Monday, May 21, 2007

Charles Moore: EU Constitution decreed by ‘papal conclave’.

In his Telegraph article on the true impetus behind fortnightly rubbish collection (which demonstrably emanates from an EU directive on recycling), Charles Moore explains precisely how unelected ‘Commissioners from Finland or Greece’ are responsible for micro-regulations which must be implemented at a local level, and that no-one in the United Kingdom is in a position to change such policies because we ‘cannot appoint or dismiss’ those who pontificate on such matters.

Whilst it is true that no British voter under the age of 50 has ever been consulted directly on anything related to EU matters, it is indisputable that two of the EEC’s founding members - France and Holland - voted ‘No’ in their respective referenda on proposals for an EU constitution. When these plans were rejected, the 'Constitution for Europe' was declared to be dead. Then there were rumours of resurrection; then evidence of 'un accident' which resulted in coma; then murmurs of reincarnation. The Prime Minister said: ‘What you cannot do is have a situation where you get a rejection of the treaty and bring it back with a few amendments and say, “Have another go”. You cannot do that.’

Cranmer foresaw years ago that they would, and they are. Chancellor Merkel was concerned to agree some ‘presentational changes’ and schemes ‘to use different terminology without changing the legal substance’, and now she is joined by President Sarkozy. As ever, it is the Franco-German alliance - the empire which President Sarkozy termed 'sacred' - which is setting the agenda. The Constitution is very much 'on track', because, according to Chancellor Merkel, it is 'Europe's soul'

On June 22, days before Prime Minister Blair is due to step down, there will be a European Council in Berlin. The resurrection of the ‘Constitution for Europe’, under the guise of a mere ‘treaty’, will be top of the agenda - indeed, the only item on the agenda - and Cranmer prophesies that Mr Blair will sign this on behalf of the United Kingdom. It will signify the agreement of the British Parliament to the provision of a permanent President of the EU, and an EU foreign minister with the authority to speak on behalf of all member states.

Prime Minister Brown will be silent on the matter.

Charles Moore takes Cranmer’s theme when he asserts that the inexorable drive to ever-closer union ‘is being conducted like a papal conclave’. In this, he echoes the late Lord Shore of Stepney, who observed that the Commission behaves ‘like a priestly caste - similar to what it must have been in pre-Reformation days, when the Bible was in Latin, not English; the Pope, his cardinals and bishops decided the content of canon law and the message came down to the laymen, only when the Latin text was translated into the vernacular by the dutiful parish priest’.

Cranmer remembers all to well what it was like, and is grateful that the Lord is opening the eyes of journalists and politicians to the nature of the beast. Such a top-down, autocratic system of government is antithetical to the bottom-up model of accountability which beats with the heart of Protestant theology. Much encouraged by this support, His Grace is in a prophesying mood, and foresees:

1) Prime Minister Brown will renege on New Labour’s commitment to hold a referendum on the EU Constitution. He will not give the British people a vote, for he knows he will not win it.

2) Her Majesty’s Opposition will miss the most significant vote-winning opportunity that could present itself; the sure and certain path to No 10. Mr Cameron might indeed offer the British people a retrospective referendum, but the folly of this strategy was evidenced in 1975 when the British people did not vote to reverse the decision taken to join the EEC in 1973. People tend to vote for the status quo: thus Mr Cameron’s offer, if it is made, and if a manifesto pledge is actually fulfilled (unlike his pledge to leave the EPP ‘in weeks’), may not, in fact, reverse the decision.

3) Ex-Prime Minister Blair will convert to Roman Catholicism, and, despite all his assertions to the contrary, shall become the first ‘President of Europe’, and thereby assure himself of his much longed-for place in history.

Of course, Mr Cameron need not pledge a referendum at all. He could simply pledge to assert parliamentary sovereignty, and give an assurance that the Labour Government’s decision to subjugate the Constitution of the United Kingdom to the ‘Constitution for Europe’ will be repealed by an incoming Conservative government. The effects of the ‘treaty’ would become null and void, and the United Kingdom would be liberated from the ‘ever closer union’ which is leading inexorably to the single State of the European Union. If the oaths taken by our elected representatives mean anything, they would consider the liberty, customs, and traditions of the 66 million people they seek to represent, and realise that in a parliamentary democracy sovereignty ultimately rests with the people. If the Conservative Party is to remain Conservative, it must pledge itself to this strategy.


Anonymous Observer said...

Jean Monnet first floated his ideas between the wars, but Italy and Germany chose a different form of Fascism to the one Monnet's dreams eventually turned into.

The project was simply to create Plato's Republic with The Guardians are a caste impervious to public antodote to Democracy....and for decades now the Anti-democrats have been on the advance like Sauron's Nazgul swooping on the somnolent and unwary

21 May 2007 at 07:51  
Anonymous bob said...

Such a top-down, autocratic system of government is antithetical to the bottom-up model of accountability which beats with the heart of Protestant theology.

Does this mean that God is ultimately accountable to man in Protestant theology?

21 May 2007 at 11:24  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Bob,

No. His Grace was speaking of earthly systems of government...

..though he appreciates your impeccable logic and manifest quick wit.

21 May 2007 at 11:48  
Anonymous bob said...

It was tongue in cheek - apologies, I simply couldn't resist!

21 May 2007 at 11:49  
Anonymous Colin said...

Unfortunately, the events foreseen by His Grace are only the beginning. The voluntary building of the European Union will be followed by a struggle for power, i.e. by attempts of domination. Similar to the US, a volunatry union followed by civil war cannot be excluded in Europe, naturally only for humanitarian reasons as was the case in the US. Who might be the next Abraham Lincoln? Will he or she be French, German or Turkish? May you live in interesting times. You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet.

21 May 2007 at 14:56  
Anonymous Observer said...

i.e. by attempts of domination.

The Russians are like that...

21 May 2007 at 16:28  
Anonymous Tanfield said...

Your Grace,
The establishment (by which I mean Politicians, Journalists, Industrialists, top Civil Servants etc.) have been trying to bring this about for the past 34 years. The Conservative Party under the late unlamented Sir Edward Heath started this and the present generation of "conservative" leaders will continue this course of action. They seem to have come to the conclusion that if the UK is to avoid becoming the 51st state of the USA it must be subjugated into the EU by hook or by crook. Who is there in public life who will reverse this onward rush into the European Superstate? Where is the Churchill of the 21st century?
Given that the Catholic Church appears to be gaining ascendance over the Protestants as a result of this who can wonder that they are at the very least not overtly objecting to this course of action?
"Those who forget their history will be compekled to relive it!"

21 May 2007 at 16:56  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Vote online about the future of Europe at

Sound bite: "Human development in its richest diversity" (J S Mill)

22 May 2007 at 10:16  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older