no way José

of the infamous Frankfurt Group writing in the Guardian intended for a British audience he makes the argument that economics, politics and the idea of globalisation and geopolitics is changing fundamentally he draws five conclusions

Firstly “we either unite or face irrelevance. Our goal must not be to maintain the status quo, but to move on to something new and better.”

secondly “the speed of the European Union and the euro area can no longer be the speed of the slowest or most reluctant member.” Nor “should Europe veer backwards to the 19th-century type of politics when peace and prosperity were supposed to be guaranteed through a precarious balance between a limited numbers of powers

Third “the crisis has shown that we need a deeper integration of policies and governance within the euro area.”

Fourthly, “all member states need to support and trust the common supranational European institutions…to ensure that decisions essential to maintaining economic stability are not held hostage to political bargaining based on narrow national interests.

Lastly, “deepening convergence and integration of the European Union must also involve deeper democracy.” He is “fascinated” by accusations that the EU officials are taking over elected politicians when, “Bodies like the European commission and European Central Bank have a duty to act in the common interest, especially when the political and economic stability of the EU is endangered.  European governments take the final decisions and that national parliaments and the European parliament guarantee democratic legitimacy.

In her article in the telegraph Janet Daley argues“this dream of a “modern” Europe is just the latest model of utopian ideology to leave wreckage in its path”

Her article is quite sound, but the situation we are dealing with as can be seen by Barroso’s op-ed is more  dystopian than utopian,as  the past week testifies. Barroso and his ilk are  culpable of practising what George Orwell termed double-think in the extreme:

“to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic”  

The believers in the  ideology of the EU are like followers of a cult or religion any differing views or divergence from the rule book are seen as treachery, they are like worshipers in adorance to the EU icon and cannot see reality that is staring them in the face.

Janet Daley ends her piece by saying “I doubt that we – or the peoples of Europe – will get any say in it at all.

I disagree, the people will eventually get their says, whether it be through the conventional measures is what is in doubt.

“euro is the norm”

Apparently “the euro is the norm”, so says Barroso anyway, Nick Robinson of the BBC asked Jose Manuel Barroso

 “If the eurozone nations are to become a much more tightly aligned fiscal and political unit – and that is what most economists think has to happen for the Euro to survive – then what happens to those on the outside, like the UK?”
The idea that “in principle” all members of the european union will eventually be eurozone members, ought to worry everyone looking at the situation as it is.
More to the point Britain seen through the eyes of the EU elites is a laughing-stock:  in the link above  Barroso says, “oh the British” in response to Nick Robinson this morning on radio4 Robinson told of how those in the room of the EPP meeting the room filled with laughter at the mention of the British, this is days after Sarkozy told us we “don’t understand Europe” because we are an island.
It is becoming clearer and clearer that Britain in Europe is not working as it is and that even the EU wants a decision ‘ in or out?’ Britain cannot remain in the EU half heartedly it leaves us in the worst possible position.
The sooner we get out the better, that it is now it is some sort of  trend in the UK to be against Europe, shows that attitudes change dramatically it is not unthinkable that if the  euro survives there would be clamour for the UK to join the euro,instead of being ‘left out’. I do not see anyone in Westminster who is willing to defend our sovereignty against the EU at the moment, why would they in the future? It cannot be left up to the puppet politicians we have, if not the people maybe we’ll have to rely on the markets.

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

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.

speaking in tongues

Just when you thought the madness of the european integrationists was at a  standstill, they push ahead further and probably faster, the crises of the eurozone, with Greece  particularly in the spotlight. The pursuit of further integration and more europe, still drives the minds of the europhiles, so detached from the realities that europe faces,
they see the only solution to the problems as more and more europe, regardless of what the people of these member states believe, need or want, regardless of economic realities and regardless of democratic legitimacy (lack thereof).

The EU summit last week discussed (mainly) the issue of the Greek economy, the debt ridden -once soveriegn- nation who will sooner or later have to default on its debts (partially or otherwise), nearly every economist predicts a Greek default, one way or another. Europe has few options to choose from, about the way they wish to react to the crises.

george Papandreou the Greek PM, will try on Tuesday to push through the Greek parliament the austerity measures required by the troika, in order for the Greek to receive the next tranch fromthe first bailout last year.
Opposition party New Democracy (apt) maintains they will vote against, the people of Greece, are unlikely to accept more austerity since, thus far the first bailout, austerity measures and reform seem to have had little effect.

eurocrat talk, initiated by one Angela Merkel, proposing that borrowers take ‘volutary’ losses, and an introduction of debt guarantees proposed by Alex Weber , the former Bundesbank chief, Sarkozy\’s ideaof private investment funds helping the bailout, amongst other initiatives coming from euroland are in reality trying ot fiddle the situation, economists and the markets have said many atime that any restructuring of the debt (in whatever form) will be seen as default. Together with the the unlikely event that Greece can reform its finances before 2013 when the EFSM package is intended to be introduced, Greece is not going to repay its debt, full stop.
Over here in blighty we have to witness the ‘\”genuinely eurosceptic\” David Cameron who insists that Britain will not play a part in the bailout, he blatantly forgot to mention our participation through the IMF, and even then as the eu keeps “kicking the can down the road”, making up new rules as we go along _ bailouts are illegal under the ‘constitution’- and as we have in David Cameron a europhile premier of the highest proportions, Britain can expect to be dragged into funding the Greeks further.

You may of noticed the attention theat the new ‘moderate eurosceptics’ have been getting in the prees, after the letter by 14 of them in the FT calling for a change in policy toward Europe. For some time there has been talk of the ’40’ who are of the 2010 general election intake, these are supposedly moderaters and modernisers, but ‘very eurosceptic’. The likes of George Eustice, Priti Patel etc… however looking at their records it can be said that the new intake are simply additions to the cameroon pack, talking the talk, tripping over when they need to walk.

The above link from conhome by Eustice makes patently clear the mirage they have painted themselves, that he says of Cameron that: “We now have a genuinely eurosceptic Prime Minister who is better placed to deliver than any of his predecessors, including Thatcher. He means business,”
is beyond parody, though should not be laughed at, if these are the sorts of people we have in Parliament, -notwithstanding the european union- directing policy then we are in serious trouble, the media are playing along, the opposition is a shambles and most of the country has not woken up to the facts.

falling like domino’s

Portugal has finally asked for a bailout from the european union, though it is not clear who will be doling out the money the european commission, the european central bank and/or the international monetary fund, though the figures being bandied about are up to 90 billion euros which the UK will be liable for about 5-10% of this.

the conditions are yet to be set out and a clearer picture is likely after EU finance ministers meet on the 8th and 9th of April this weekend. though what is apparent is the bailouts of the PIG countries thus far have seen the countries economies stagnate and the populations stuck with quite extreme  austerity measures.

What is obvious is, these bailouts are taken through near force and that the beneficiaries are those in Brussels willing to do anything to keep the euro afloat, whatever the consequences. It may be that these countries deserve the harsh punishment, but was the EU and the euro not meant to unite the european nation states, as in one for all all for one.

Not so, and it never will be, This says it all really — “Democratic legitimacy? It’s not necessary. Apparently they had some mandate when they made the request last night. So if they were empowered last night to make the request, they are empowered to progress with negotiations,” from the commission economy spokesman Amadeu Altafaj speaking after socrates asked for the bailout merely hours before.

in relation to the current portugese government being a ‘caretaker’ government ( thus not having the legitimacy to agree a bailout package, without a popular mandate)   he goes on to say “It’s not their programme any more. It’s ours,”

It is surprising the portugese hadnt realised that they would be sacrificed for the sake of the project, many British realised long ago that it is our masters in Brussels running the show. In or out of the euro it does not matter, membership of  the EU means the EU rules.

Though when our own government(s) will wake up to the fact and DO something is another matter.

 

more on that ‘peoples’ pledge.

Today at muffled vociferation has posted on the deception of the peoples pledge, it has made me think about the campaign in more depth, having joined the dots it would seem that those serial con artists Douglas Carswell and Daniel Hannan, are most likely the (real) organizers of this, I have posted previously on the issue of them wanting to close down B.O.O.

And both Carswell and Hannan are on the advisory council and are promoting the pledge. As the post by MF suggests they may just be a bone thrown to the right of the party and the conservatives of the public still hoping that Cameron’s ‘conservatives’ might just one day fight the sceptic cause. It would suit all the culprits, Cameron does not really mention the subject of a referendum or withdrawal unless pressed and Carswell and Hannan, publish books, make television appearances, keep their seats in Parliament(s) and purport to be for all things they set out in the plan.

I may be wrong that those two are not some cons, but having been blocked by Carswell for asking perfectly reasonable questions regarding democracy questioning his eurosceptic credentials, his lapdog adherence to every word that comes from Dan Hannans mouth, and his stooge like performance in Camerons precense. It would seem he has something to hide. As equally does Hannan, just why they wanted to shut down B.O.O. still remains unclear.

the peoples pledge, is in effect the same as the pledge by all Liberal Democrats (ALL) signed the NUS pledge card to stop any increase in tuition fees, and yet reneged. Cameron reneged on his pledge to the sun of holding a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty as did the nulab and libdems when they put the policy in their manifesto’s all those years ago.

So even if these MPs who are being targeted sign the pledge, who or what is to say they will stick to it? There is no evidence to suggest they would, and the party line always take percedence over personal belief. I have not signed the peoples pledge as yet, and am not planning on doing so. As it says on the site the aim is not to exit europe but to have a referendum, the idea sounds great until you dig a little deeper.

If a referendum is held, will the reult be taken into account if a NO vote is produced or would the country be forced to vote again (as in Ireland). None of the three main parties proposes exit and with the referendum funding policy being changed who’s guessing that the lib/lab/con wont conspire against an out campaign and if an IN vote is won the sceptic cause will be lost for a generation.

Anything to do with those like Carswell and Hannan need to be gone over with a fine tooth comb, as i suspect they have different motivations than those who would like to see Britain out of europe. Maybe UKIP is the only hope (at the moment)?

in-out in-out shake it all about

Today, comes good news and hope for those of us who wish to see, the politicians of Westminster squirm then relent and grant the public the referendum they not only want but deserve.

Only last week quisling Cameron, declared that he wishes to stay in the European Union and that an in-out referendum was out of the question, as most know a referendum on the issue of Europe has not been held since 1975 that even was only on the issue of the EEC, David Cameron , nick clegg, Ed Miliband etc, can try to put this off as they wish, but in the end the political class will  suffer the consequences; those being  the result of an even more frustrated electorate delivering an out answer.

The peoples pledge, is an initiative of the left, in favour of membership but realising the democratic deficit of EU membership and the people of this nation need to have a say. Caroline Lucas of the Green party, Keith Vaz of Labour and other unexpected names have cropped up, are in favour but want the decision to rest with the people and whatever you may think of them they have to be applauded for this.

David Cameron like Blair, Brown and Clegg pledged to hold a referendum then reneged, (“I know best. Your views are irrelevant. Get used to it.”)promised to claw back sovereignty and competences, and has reneged, (the EU Bill is nothing but a token gesture). He is now so in hock with the EU, Merkel, Sarkozi, etc. He yearns for the next EU summit, as it is known these summits and gatherings are pure photo opportunities and serve only to cause more trouble back in the leader own backyards when they return home.

It is now time for a referendum, and I urge everyone to sign the pledge , the country has been betrayed by our leaders repeatedly on this issue, and it will be them who are left on the back-foot for not initiating this themselves.

The media seems also to be waking up to the elephant in the room, the Daily Mail, Express, and Guardian have recently started printing (talking) about the issue more prominently, it is only thoe who have ‘power’ who would not  like a referendum, realising that a no vote would end their cosy dwellings once and for all.

sign the pledge