I try to keep my political view off of here as it could lead to unpleasantness,s and we dont want that do we . This is NOT about politics its about you , your kids and their kids and what sort of Britain you want for them . There will probably be a referendum this year or next so you need to do your homework on the EU and its ( corruptness ) intentions , here is a good read .
The Queen’s Speech of 27th May promised a referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union. She said that her Government would “renegotiate our terms of membership”, and we are promised an in-or-out referendum by the end of 2017. But what exactly is being promised?
Let’s first recap on how we became members of the European Economic Community, as it then was, in the first place. Edward Heath’s Conservative Government of 1970 had no democratic mandate to seek membership; Heath had promised to negotiate terms of membership “no less, no more”. It was generally understood that his government would put these terms to the people in a new general election or by a referendum.
But in 1972 he ignored his promise and signed the Treaty of Rome. His Government passed the European Communities Act (1972) not by means of a conservative majority in the House of Commons but on a very narrow vote of MPs cobbled together with support of Labour and the Liberals.
Harold Wilson’s Labour government of 1974 won on the promise of a referendum; and it put its renegotiated terms to the voters in the referendum of 1975. The referendum campaign’s successful Yes vote was engineered by the BBC and various organs of the press. It is now a matter of historical record that the USA’s Central Intelligence Agency funded the European movement and its drive for political and economic integration because it fitted in with the USA’s foreign policy aims.
So much for the history; but it explains the deep divisions and passions that have governed the debate over ‘Europe’ ever since. Those divisions hinge on national sovereignty. Heath promised that there would be “no loss of essential sovereignty” something he admitted was a lie many years after.
However, until 1987 we did have the right of veto on EU laws we did not want. Mrs Thatcher surrendered that veto under the Single European Act (1987), and ever since the story of the EU has been about the signing of successive treaties that have surrendered more and more power to the EU.
So where are we now? Most of our new laws now come from the European Union not our own Parliament. Estimates vary as to how much. A study by the German Parliament in 2006 calculated that 84% of new laws came from the EU; Gordon Brown when PM said it was about 50%; other estimates range at about 75%.
The actual figure will vary year to year depending on the amount of laws passed by the EU, but the simple truth is that most of our laws now come from the EU. The main job of our Parliament is to transpose EU Directives into Acts of Parliament – something they are obliged to do.
As a Member of the European Parliament I see every month the torrent of legislation, and reports on proposed legislation, that come before us. The British Government and Parliament have lost power over things down to the level of what kind of light bulbs are permissible and the wattage allowed in vacuum cleaners.
So what then is Mr Cameron going to renegotiate exactly? Will he demand the return of power over agriculture and fishing, trade, energy, and employment law? Or perhaps over health and safety, police co-operation, extradition law, or perhaps tourism, transport, space and sport? The list could go on and on if only I had the space.
So far we have heard that Mr Cameron wants to renegotiate issues to do with the migration of EU citizens. It is mooted that he wants to have a minimum period before migrants can claim benefits; and that he wants a ‘transition period’ regarding migration from new entrant countries to the EU. These are important things but they are not the essential issue.
What I confidently predict is that Mr Cameron will ‘renegotiate’ some minor cosmetic changes, just as Harold Wilson did in 1975, present these as a great diplomatic triumph and recommend a vote to remain in the EU. But the real issue is not about regaining control over particular areas of policy it is about something much more essential: and that is who governs Britain?
If there is a referendum (and I won’t believe it until I actually see it), then the real question should be: do we want to be governed and legislated over by the undemocratic institutions of the European Union, or do we want to return sovereignty and our rights of democratic self determination to our own democratically elected and accountable Parliament and government? Any other question will be just a smokescreen to obscure the real issue. The real issue is whether the British want to be a free people or not.
The Queen’s Speech of 27th May promised a referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union. She said that her Government would “renegotiate our terms of membership”, and we are promised an in-or-out referendum by the end of 2017. But what exactly is being promised?
Let’s first recap on how we became members of the European Economic Community, as it then was, in the first place. Edward Heath’s Conservative Government of 1970 had no democratic mandate to seek membership; Heath had promised to negotiate terms of membership “no less, no more”. It was generally understood that his government would put these terms to the people in a new general election or by a referendum.
But in 1972 he ignored his promise and signed the Treaty of Rome. His Government passed the European Communities Act (1972) not by means of a conservative majority in the House of Commons but on a very narrow vote of MPs cobbled together with support of Labour and the Liberals.
Harold Wilson’s Labour government of 1974 won on the promise of a referendum; and it put its renegotiated terms to the voters in the referendum of 1975. The referendum campaign’s successful Yes vote was engineered by the BBC and various organs of the press. It is now a matter of historical record that the USA’s Central Intelligence Agency funded the European movement and its drive for political and economic integration because it fitted in with the USA’s foreign policy aims.
So much for the history; but it explains the deep divisions and passions that have governed the debate over ‘Europe’ ever since. Those divisions hinge on national sovereignty. Heath promised that there would be “no loss of essential sovereignty” something he admitted was a lie many years after.
However, until 1987 we did have the right of veto on EU laws we did not want. Mrs Thatcher surrendered that veto under the Single European Act (1987), and ever since the story of the EU has been about the signing of successive treaties that have surrendered more and more power to the EU.
So where are we now? Most of our new laws now come from the European Union not our own Parliament. Estimates vary as to how much. A study by the German Parliament in 2006 calculated that 84% of new laws came from the EU; Gordon Brown when PM said it was about 50%; other estimates range at about 75%.
The actual figure will vary year to year depending on the amount of laws passed by the EU, but the simple truth is that most of our laws now come from the EU. The main job of our Parliament is to transpose EU Directives into Acts of Parliament – something they are obliged to do.
As a Member of the European Parliament I see every month the torrent of legislation, and reports on proposed legislation, that come before us. The British Government and Parliament have lost power over things down to the level of what kind of light bulbs are permissible and the wattage allowed in vacuum cleaners.
So what then is Mr Cameron going to renegotiate exactly? Will he demand the return of power over agriculture and fishing, trade, energy, and employment law? Or perhaps over health and safety, police co-operation, extradition law, or perhaps tourism, transport, space and sport? The list could go on and on if only I had the space.
So far we have heard that Mr Cameron wants to renegotiate issues to do with the migration of EU citizens. It is mooted that he wants to have a minimum period before migrants can claim benefits; and that he wants a ‘transition period’ regarding migration from new entrant countries to the EU. These are important things but they are not the essential issue.
What I confidently predict is that Mr Cameron will ‘renegotiate’ some minor cosmetic changes, just as Harold Wilson did in 1975, present these as a great diplomatic triumph and recommend a vote to remain in the EU. But the real issue is not about regaining control over particular areas of policy it is about something much more essential: and that is who governs Britain?
If there is a referendum (and I won’t believe it until I actually see it), then the real question should be: do we want to be governed and legislated over by the undemocratic institutions of the European Union, or do we want to return sovereignty and our rights of democratic self determination to our own democratically elected and accountable Parliament and government? Any other question will be just a smokescreen to obscure the real issue. The real issue is whether the British want to be a free people or not.