theres just no hope for some

this  is the sort of thing that ruins the cause, leads the europhile left-wing press, cameroons etc. to laugh off the idea of Britain as a sovereign state and claim that anyone who thinks being in europe is not the best option is a ‘fruit-cake’, ‘loony’, ‘racist’ or even ‘homophobic’. John Redwood or dead wood as autonomous mind put it, asks his readers “what powers would you like back?” in his latest post, and then reels off a list as though he is a five year old writing out the Christmas wish list.

Leaving aside the fact that powers cannot be returned, the suggestions he makes on the list itself are  pathetic since alone they will not change our relationship with the EU, even if government achieved his whole list.

Redwood forgets that he is  an MP of the ‘conservative’ party, that makes up the majority of the coalition who claim to be “governing in the national interest” but  which has no intention of returning powers from Brussels to the UK and putting the national interest first. Nor does he realise that his leader is quite happy with the status quo and  is dismissive of him and his stated aims, so you wonder why John Redwood takes his frustration out on UKIPers

“who will write in to condemn what we are trying to achieve, I have two simple questions. What power have the UKIP MEPs got back for us? And what progress have the UKIP MEPs made to getting the UK out of the EU in line with their stated policy?”

You do not have to be a UKIP supporter to realise that Britain is better off out of the EU, now I am not a supporter but they simply do not have the capacity to remove Britain from the EU, for one there is not enough of them. Redwood as an MP in the governing coalition could use his own position to influence government policy in-line with his own stated aims, yet his record shows that he has not.

there is just no hope, for some.

hocus pocus…

It is enough to drive one mad, the Sunday papers are as ever, full of half truths and misinformation. The European Union and Mondays referendum debate receives a lot of attention from all sides of the political spectrum,

All is not well with douglas carswell who today is taking touchy tim’s place , he seems to have lost the plot let alone ‘the plan’, as he does on his own blog he speaks as though he is not part of the “SW1 clique” or “Westminster bubble”, delusional he seems to be publicly leading a double life. Carswell is a conservative MP in the Westminster Parliament, the ‘conservative’ party is leading the government this country has to put up with. In the same vein Carswell pushes the lie that ‘renegotiation’ is possible. One wonders why he does it? Cameron is never going to give him a promotion, so his motives are unclear though I hear that ‘the plan‘ is now an ebook£


Far from the  fight back the government’s press release would lead you to believe matthew d’ancona informs us that

“In private, senior Tories acknowledge that there is no serious prospect of an aggressive programme for the repatriation of powers from Brussels as long as the Coalition exists in its present form”

nick clegg seems to confirm this and has fiercely rebuked the tory ‘eurosceptics’ on the matter, and claims it would be “economic suicide” to try to change Britain relationship with the EU.

Simon Heffer -whose commentary I have to say has deteriorated since moving to the Mail- seems to be naive enough to believe the propaganda as he suggests that we renegotiate or repatriate powers back from Brussels, and then uses David Campbell-Bannerman  and his ‘ultimate plan b’as a source of  astuteness is laughable.

Heffer also pays “a sincere tribute to those who defied the three line whip”, this says it all, the vote on the motion was non-binding: when we see these ‘rebels’ defy the whip on a real in/out referendum debate for a real in/out referendum then they may deserve some sort praise. Peter Hitchens has a half good idea, the problem with it is that, most of those ‘rebels’ in the ‘conservative’ party do not have the guts to do it.

Someone who knows what he is talking about is Christopher Booker with the only article I can find in the msm today of any grasp of the facts and realities of the EU, from his piece:

“because the way Britain is governed has become so inextricably enmeshed with “Europe”. Anyone who thinks we can “renegotiate” has no understanding of what this project is about, or its most sacred principle – that powers, once handed over, can never be given back. So we must stay in, dragged along by a process over which we have no control…”

and

“…the project is slowly heading for very messy and prolonged disintegration. Everyone involved, it seems, is trapped, and the only way Britain will leave the EU is when it falls apart, around us and everyone else…”

No doubt this idea of repatriation or renegotiation of powers will continue to be pushed by the government and its followers, even though the facts say different. As Booker says the process of collapse of the EU has started, it is just a matter of time.

The only thing people who believe that Britain should be out of the European Union can do now is try to speed up the process; getting the facts out there is most important, so that the public is informed  that  is  best way to put pressure on those in power.

ground control to Major (John), you’ve really made the grade

The (insane) oddity that is John Major reared his head again in the FT print ed yesterday to give his opinion on the euro crisis and where he thinks it is going.

Major says “hindsight is often graceless” and so it is with that he tells us that he kept Britain out of sterling because “I had a political objection as well: that entry into the euro, and the abolition of sterling, would remove key policy options from the British government. That is why at Maastricht, I opted out of the euro” *cough*

Take that as you will. Major also believes “We are drifting towards full fiscal union: only the timescale is flexible”. This  possibility has been the a central ideal to the european federalists for some time now, and Major like others before, suggests that those outside the eurozone but of the EU may in the end want to join it through the fact that those in the eurozone will inevitably be making most of the important decisions. What EU leaders came up with at Wednesday’s summit, contrary to what some are cheering simplywont save Europe the ‘big bazooka’ did not crystallize and the rally yesterday of the markets will likely deflate just as quick.

The drifting towards “full fiscal union” may yet take place, proposals for this are due at Christmas, but it would take years to be a reality. The other option of break-up, is anathema to EU politicians  and will be fought at every step, but it is also possible;  fiscal union would require the people of europe to either agree to such an entity or be bypassed in an authoritarian manner. in the event would end in the thing Chancellor Merkel warns of.

George Eustice has set out a blueprint in a white paper for the government to plan ‘renegotiation’ it is a useless operation as useless as its author. The European Union has consistently tried to solve the eurozone crisis by making small and insignificant gestures, which  quickly crumble under scrutiny.

The government should  ignore Major and prepare for any of the scenarios which could emerge from the crisis, keeping in mind that the euro is ultimately a flawed project much like the EU itself, it is -in time- going to fail fatally, the government should grab its protein pills, put its helmet on and get OUT  as soon as events allows, and simply wish them, good luck

no exits

the situation of the eurozone is dire, for the european union it is not any better. As national leaders assemble for yet another summit it is clear that politicians are attempting to play a game of clash of the titans with the realities of the economics, one they will most definitely lose: historically the economics has always trumped the  politics, and I don’t see this trend changing.

Leaders have three things on the agenda, Greek debt, boosting european banks capital and the leveraging the EFSF up to an amount not agreed – 2-3 trillion? – a process which looks like a Ponzi scheme and disaster waiting to happen.

David Cameron has gone along to the summit he ‘insisted’ on attending, with what intentions he has not said. Just what Cameron thinks he can provide to bringing about a solution to the crisis when he cannot even provide a solution to the growing problems of the British economy, I am not sure. But it is another photo opportunity so we shall let him have it.

The eurozone seems to have only two options push forth with ‘ever closer union’ fiscal integration with tax and  spend authority, complete with a finance ministry and minister. Or break-up of the union in some form or another be it into two; weak and strong. Or a complete dismantle of the currency union.

The summit tonight will not end with complete proposals, but this and this, give a good summary of the situation as it stands.

Ultimately it is the people of the european union will take most of the pain from the crisis. To paraphrase the great federalist WIlliam Hague; it might be a good idea to lock all EU politicians in a building with no exits and take away all the fire extinguishers.

withdraw

The backbench debate on an EU referendum has caused much excitement in Westminster, the  motion was ‘negatived on division. (Ayes: 111, Noes: 483)’, the significance of the debate is not as much as the hype being discussed, it will not do what it says on the tin, it was defeated and in any case was not binding on the government. It has though, brought attention to the credibility of Cameron’s leadership and his  preferment for rhetoric over action.

The number of ‘rebels’ was increased by the wording of the motion; including the third option of ‘renegotiation’ allowed the majority who supported the motion a get out clause and a chance to kick Cameron for whatever grievances they may have. Renegotiation is simply not an option, it  needs to be made clear to those suggesting that renegotiation is an option and those that have been naive enough to believe them.

For Britain or any other member state in the European Union decide it would like to withdraw from any policy area signed up to through the various treaties, directives and legislation. Britain or that member state would have to seek agreement from the other 26 member states, and an amendment to the existing treaties would need to take place.

The likelihood of  the 26 member states  agreeing on Britain opting out of policy areas that it does not find favourable, while they themselves remain signed up to it is nil, it is as though those advocating ‘renegotiation’, they seem to think that  EU treaties are  a box of chocolates where you pick out the nice pieces and leaves the rest for the next idiot.

Cameron and co still claim to be eurosceptic, even after all the broken promises and ‘cast iron’ guarantees, some will keep the pretence going – it serves both their interests, others are naive enough to actually believe it. Cameron calls himself a ‘euro-realist’ :read federalist,  he has consistently used the issue of europe as bait to the party using it whenever he needs their support, ignorant when it does not suit his needs.

It has to be asked why those in the party who do not agree with the position of the leadership continue to support the leadership, in the FT today Tristan-Garel-Jones (former minister for europe under Thatcher and Major) another europlast, says those that are “stuck in the 19th century model of the nation-state and who advocate withdrawal from the EU” should withdraw from the party.  it is the obvious suggestion to make while the quisling leadership is so at odds with their views.

remorseless

With the ongoing ,euro crisis the dithering of our supposed leaders, and failures to grasp the scale of the problems inherent to the project. The saga goes on sabotaging the economic prospects of most nations signed up to the eurozone, whilst continuing the pretence that they actually do anything at the numerous  summits held, other than rehearse the same arguments over and over without any sufficient conclusions. this weekends summit is no different, vague proposals which are to be set out when leaders meet again Wednesday, look set to disrupt the markets once again. In the end it will be the markets  that put an end to the crisis, while eurozone leaders are still talking about merkels diet.

Recently George Osborne speaking to the FT  for the government said it is the “remorseless logic” for those in the eurozone to proceed with deeper fiscal integration, in order to solve the crisis, maybe, but this is another example of the government making grand statements for a few headlines without thinking of the consequences;

Now, there is to be a euro empire creating fiscal union within the eurozone with a central european finance ministry of some sort, a finance minister and treaty change is now on the cards for this to come into being,

Chancellor Merkel has been pushing for treaty change for some time, pressing for this centralisation of economic policy in order to bring profligate nations into line.

For the UK such an outcome, is likely to see our own economic governance come under pressure to converge with what the eurozone nations agree, QMV  ensure that Britain will be outvoted on any measures undertaken.

According to the coalition the treaty change needed for the ‘euro empire’ would not trigger the ‘referendum lock’, as though a core of euro countries set apart from the remaining outside the euro would not be a ‘major’ change in Britain’s relationship with the EU.

On Tuesday Bill Cash is proposing an  amendment to the European Act in a ten minute rule bill

 

“Apply the terms of the European Union Act 2011 such as to require approval
by Act of Parliament and by referendum of provisions for creating a fiscal
union or economic governance within the Eurozone”

requiring a change to the European Act if  the situation where a  euro core emerges and  Britain remains out a referendum would be required. No doubt the government will impose the whip against this too.

pointless posturing

The debate in the House of Commons on Monday put forward by David Nutall MP and granted by the backbench business committee is as follows:

“The House calls upon the Government to introduce a Bill in the next session of Parliament to provide for the holding of a national referendum on whether the United Kingdom

(a) should remain a member of the European Union on the current terms;

(b) leave the European Union; or

(c) re-negotiate the terms of its membership in order to create a new relationship based on trade and co-operation.”

The motion for the debate itself is utterly flawed, (a) to remain a member of the EU on current terms, is a scenario no one wants not even the most enthusiastic eurofanatic believes that Britain’s relationship at present is ideal, it is Cameron’s rosy scenario where the issue can be brushed away and people stop ‘banging on’ about europe, however it is not even an option crisis in the euro zone and its spillover effects will not allow for the status quo.

whilst (b) leaving the european union is the favoured option, the fact is a new political arrangement needs to be ready to take its place, those in Westminster are not up to the task of governing without the influence and direction of the EU, were the country to put its fate in the hands of  the party (lib/lab/con), democracy, governance and our politics would indeed worsen.

As wittering witney and autonomous mind point out the country is not even ready to be asked this question in a referendum, with the public so ill-informed on the subject, through obfuscation from our politicians and the media, the whole issue of the European Union is boiled down to headline grabbers such as the infamous straight banana or what the definition of chocolate is.

A comment by don wreford on autonomous mind’ post above makes the point asking if “we may have to have a phd on politics to understand?” a phd may not be needed, but vast amounts of reading and inquiry are, to understand the workings of the EU and the consequences of being a member. Educating the public is not going to be an easy task when the people who gain most from the EU’s very existence rely on misleading the public and keeping them in the dark about the facts, to keep the charade going.
Exit from the EU now or in the forseeable future, is not likely to come from referenda, the only route is the long road through clear information getting through to the wider public, or with self inflicted implosion, which is not as unlikely as once thought.

(c) in the motion to renegotiation  membership to create a relationship based on trade and co-operation; is simply not an option, membership of the  European Union is not a pick and choose situation, the other 26 members would not agree to Britain remaining in the EU on a trade based negotiation, while they remain signed up to the unfavourable arrangements. Those that believe this outcome is possible are on never-never land, there is more chance of us being booted out than this idea.

we wont leave europe, but it wont rule us” is a re-hash of William Hague’s  old “in europe not run by europe”  slogan  the europlasts use for cover,it is not only misleading it defies reality. The 27 nations that are in the EU are run by the EU whether leaders admit it or not. CCHQ  have put out this briefing  going over the same old lines as, ‘blame labour’, ‘we need a majority’, ‘we have a referendum lock’ etc. is a smokescreen to try to hide behind, attempting to keep up the pretence that the conservative really are sceptic.

Even in the event of Westminster initiating such ‘renegotiation’ what could be expected? a few more fish allowed to be kept by fisherman? or no increase in the British contribution to the EU budget? it would be a continuation of bone-throwing to the Conservative party while Cameron tries to keep his position. The sideshow tomorrow in the HoC, will come to nothing, it is not binding and will serve only to detract attention away from the governments incompetence over economic policy and pretty much all else. Britain has signed up to the Treaties, which once signed are simply not up for discussion, with David Cameron speaking for the country in Europe there is even less hope of any good deal arising, unless you are angela merkel treaty change, worthy of the name is not an option.

Cameron + co, are only too pleased with how the debate looks set to go, the ‘rebels’ are unable to force a referendum, and will be made to look supposedly out of touch. Having moved the timetable of debate, Cameron gets to enjoy the sound of his own voice for longer, and will limit time for discussion, so from the backbenchers who do get a say, we will most likely hear them once again speaking to themselves rather than the people they are supposed to represent.

It is pointless posturing, the hype over tomorrows debate is going to leave everyone underwhelmed, whatever is said in the Commons tomorrow is of little importance, compared to whats happening with the euro .