Thursday, March 11, 2010

Is the EU about to give Cameron his winning ticket?

Last year, William Hague said that a Conservative government would not go to battle with the EU over returning sovereignty to Britain for a number of years.

Yesterday, he reiterated that the Party would avoid 'instant confrontation' with EU.

But it transpires that they may be forced to call early UK referendum on a new EU treaty being suggested by Germany.

It appears that the Constitution for Europe Lisbon Treaty was not the all-singing, all-dancing, self-amending political juggernaut some thought it was. The ‘passerelle clause’ is evidently deemed insufficient to deal with the present financial crisis which threatens to bring down the euro.

Chancellor Merkel is of the opinion that a new treaty is required to create a new European Monetary Fund able to bail out crisis-hit members of the euro like Greece. It will be the Fiscal Federalism Treaty – effectively be a further power-grab over taxation and spending. All, of course, under the guise of ameliorating the EU’s ‘economic governance’.

In the political fallout following the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty and the cross-party ratting on the promised referendum, both Labour and the Conservatives stated unequivocally that any further treaties would be put to the British people in a referendum. David Cameron promised a Sovereignty Bill to put a ‘referendum lock’ on all future negotiations.

As inconvenient as it might be for all three main parties for an ‘EU confrontation’ to enter the General Election campaign, it is really a glorious opportunity for David Cameron.

While Labour and the LibDems bang on about being ‘at the heart of Europe’, the ‘national interest’ and the need for cooperation with our ‘European partners’, the objective will be to portray the Conservative Party as ‘xenophobic’, ‘right-wing’ ‘little Englanders’, allied with ‘extremist’, ‘homophobic’ and ‘racist’ groups in the European Parliament.

The problem is that the overwhelming majority of the electorate are instinctively in tune with the Conservative disposition on this matter. It is not, of course, that they are ‘xenophobic’, ‘right-wing’ or ‘phobic’ ‘little Englanders’, but they are patriotic, discerning and moderate, with genuine concerns about uncontrolled immigration and the unelected, unaccountable, immovable beast to which our once-omnipotent Parliament is now but an ornamental, ineffectual, expendable regional talking shop.

James Kirkup is of the opinion that any new treaty ‘could cause serious headaches for both Labour and Conservatives alike’.

He refers to Gordon Brown’s promise: ‘I can confirm that, not just for this Parliament but also for the next, it is the position of the Government to oppose any further institutional change in the relationship between the EU and its member states.’ (Hansard, 22 October 2007).

Which rather ties the Prime Minister’s hands.

And the position of the Conservatives: ‘A Conservative Government would change the law so that never again would a government be able to agree to a Treaty that hands over areas of power from Britain to the EU without a referendum.’ (CCHQ)

But Cranmer is bemused by Mr Kirkup’s pessimism.

A great ‘Euro-battle’, a ‘confrontation’ with the EU, or a ‘bust-up’ with our ‘European partners’ is exactly what we need: it would invigorate the coming months of interminable ‘Red Tory’, ‘New Labour’, ‘centre-ground’ tedium no end.

It would highlight New Labour’s manifesto betrayal and the Prime Minister’s decision to renege on his referendum promise; it would call Nick Clegg’s bluff on his 'power to the people' mantra; and the Conservatives would witness an instant boost in the opinion polls.

If proof were needed of the reality of the federalist-fiscal threat, Daniel Hannan tells us that MEPs have voted overwhelmingly in favour of an EU ‘Tobin tax’ – that is a tax on all financial transactions.

And he reports that they voted 536 to 80: only the European Conservatives and Reformist group and a handful of radicals opposed the motion.

The Spectator says this vindicates the Cameron-Hague decision to leave the EPP, who, being pathologically federalist (in a continental sense), voted uniformly in favour.

Any such tax would grant the EU its longed-for elixir of direct supra-national taxation, but it would burden the City with punitive transaction costs and the whole proposal is inimical to British interests.

On the face of it, an intervention by Chancellor Merkel and (doubtless soon) by President Van Rompuy at this point in the UK’s electoral cycle is foolish.

Yet Greece has forced the agenda, and so a bruising debate about Britain’s economic relationship with the EU appears to be both imminent and unavoidable.

But this is not a ‘headache’ for Mr Cameron: it is a heaven-sent opportunity for him to talk about the absolutes of sovereignty, to proclaim the immutable conservative principles and expound his inviolable ‘red-lines’.

And if the German Chancellor will not listen, let Mr Cameron not only threaten but promise what our Lords and Masters in Brussels most fear: a UK referendum on Britain’s future relationship with the EU.

It would not only trump Labour, it would neuter the LibDems and sink UKIP.

And David Cameron would walk to victory.


Anonymous Robert Eve said...

I live in hope!!

11 March 2010 at 09:43  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

He would, but he wont, and you are dreaming again.

11 March 2010 at 09:49  
Blogger Nephilim Child said...

Your Grace,

Do`s (cast iron) iDave really want to cut the EU umbilical cord?

If he does, does he have the stomach for the fight?

sigh! who knows the truth?

11 March 2010 at 09:57  
Anonymous philip walling said...

Spot on again YG!

If Dave isn't up for the fight there is a greater one comes after him, whose shoe laces he is not fit to loose, who certainly is.

11 March 2010 at 10:16  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace

You are right. This is a golden opportunity. If only the Conservative High Command could grasp it and exploit it for all its worth.

The conservative bloggers in cyber-space out number the socialist bloggers; cyber-space could be mobilised to turn against New Labour.

If and when the Socialists project ‘Little Englander’ jibes at the Conservative Party – that will only channel more votes to the Conservatives.

Chance and opportunity happen to all political parties.

[Mr Walling - that is what I am thinking - I've said for a long time that it will end up as a hung parliament - and there is another man's name written on the door of 10 Downing Street.]

11 March 2010 at 10:26  
Blogger Preacher said...

Your Grace.
It's not often that a chance for a second bite of the apple comes around, but it seems D.C has a charmed life. If he has the courage to stand firm & duke it out with all comers he should sweep to a landslide victory, the question is, will he? the coming few days will be very telling.

11 March 2010 at 11:04  
Blogger English Viking said...

Anybody hoping any of the parties will keep manifesto pledges needs their head looking into.

Lab and Con have both promised referenda on this issue and both have reneged.

How convenient dodgy Dave goes all sceptic, just before an election. He'll be wanting a war with Argentina next.

11 March 2010 at 11:31  
Anonymous no nonny said...

Hope Springs Eternal.

11 March 2010 at 11:31  
Anonymous philip walling said...

Benedict Brogan, in what used to be the Torygraph, this morning fears (inter alia) that the Conservatives are not up to the street-fighting needed to counter the lying, conniving, smearing, ruffians (with Brown as the uber-ruffian).

If not, why not?

It's nearly worth letting Brown win so that he inherits the scorched earth he's leaving for the Tories.

We could leave the country en-masse for five years, give up work and go beach-combing until the Brown Terror destroys itself.

11 March 2010 at 11:58  
Blogger Gnostic said...

I'll believe Cameron's claim for a referendum when I actually hold the ballot paper in my hand.

Until then, following the breaking of his "cast iron" promise, anything he says on the matter will be treated by me as nothing more than p*ss and wind.

11 March 2010 at 13:06  
Blogger ukipwebmaster said...

Oooh! Another promise to break!

They're already planning direct taxation but as Dave says, they don't want confrontation.

11 March 2010 at 13:35  
Blogger The Boiling Frog said...

Cameron has already effectively ruled out an 'in or out' referendum. Specifically, he said on Andrew Marr a few months ago:

"I don’t want an ‘in or out’ referendum because I don’t think out is in Britain’s interests.”

Cameron won't hold a referendum because he knows he'll lose, by his own admission.

11 March 2010 at 13:46  
Blogger 13th Spitfire said...

This is a very naive post; to think that Cameron would ever act like a conservative is wishful thinking and dangerous. It is dangerous because it instills false hope in those who do not know better than to trust the words of politicians.

11 March 2010 at 13:47  
Anonymous graham Wood said...

Strange how all 13 posters on this Blog so far exhibit a predictable spirit of cynicism!
Perhaps look at another Blog then?

Lo and behold Richard North's Referendum Bloc displays the same noble sentiments with:

"in a matter of weeks now, we are to vote in a general election, supposedly to choose our next government. You can quite understand why so many people are entirely indifferent to this event. A few individuals in Westminster may swap sides in the House, but our rulers will stay the same."

Not much more to say about that is there?

11 March 2010 at 13:59  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

…the overwhelming majority of the electorate are instinctively in tune with the Conservative disposition on this matter.

Wrong. The Conservative disposition is to remain in, and to remain in love with, the EU; has Your Grace forgotten already that Cameron sent the fundamentalist Europhile Ken Clarke to Brussels to reassure the Commission that it had nothing to fear from a Conservative government? The disposition of the people is to rid themselves of Brussels.

The ‘Euro-battle’ you call for would not only highlight Brown’s betrayal of an election promise and Clegg’s ‘bluff’; it would also highlight Cameron’s disgraceful repudiation of his cast-iron guarantee. So, bring on the Euro-battle—the more people are reminded of Cameron’s untrustworthiness, the better for BNP and UKIP.

Daniel Hannan tells us that MEPs have voted overwhelmingly in favour of an EU ‘Tobin tax’…

Open Europe publishes a league table of MEPs under the headings of ‘Transparency, openness and democracy’ and ‘Fighting waste and the misuse of EU funds’. The 2009 league table is here. The criteria used in the table are here. Hannan, the champion of transparent government, languishes at 124th in the table. Hardly surprising considering his voting record:

Vote for easier public access to EU documents: Daniel Hannan abstained.

Vote to keep MEPs’ expenses and accounts secret: Daniel Hannan voted in favour.

Vote to ignore the outcome of the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty: Daniel Hannan abstained.

Opting into the Parliament’s controversial second pension scheme: For every £1 MEPs contribute to the fund, the taxpayer contributes £2. MEPs’ own contributions come not from their salary, but are taken automatically from their generous office expenses. MEPs are supposed to reimburse this account but there are no checks and it is suspected that many do not repay the money…In 1997 the Dutch Parliament said the fund was ‘morally objectionable’ and said it allowed MEPs to ‘get rich by milking the taxpayer’. Daniel Hannan has ‘continuing membership of the pension fund’.

Vote to continue ‘hypocritical’ EU subsidies to tobacco farmers: Over the years, the EU has spent billions on subsidising the tobacco industry. Daniel Hannan voted to continue the subsidies.

Vote to approve the Commission’s error-prone 2007 accounts: Daniel Hannan voted to approve the accounts.

11 March 2010 at 14:06  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace

Your article has been hyperlinked by ConservativeHome.

11 March 2010 at 14:23  
Anonymous Zach Johnstone said...

It will be interesting to see whether Cameron seizes the initiative and pre-emptively sets out his stall, or whether he will put this off until events move along and either sweep this episode under the carpet or force his hand.

I will be half expecting this issue to crop up in the course of the televised debates next month. Yesterday I was with Bob Worcester, founder of MORI, who astutely observed that "you can't win debates but you can certainly lose them". This is the type of policy that Cameron can use to present himself as forward-thinking, courageous and in defence of the national interest and thereby utilise these debates as a means of pushing hard towards the 7 or 8% swing needed to form a majority government on May 7th at Buckingham Palace..

11 March 2010 at 14:44  
Anonymous not a machine said...

I just keep trying all the different options of the EU and I cant warm to any of them .I dont want the euro and I fail to see why we should bail out the EUs overbloated mis mangement. I dont deny it has helped reform post soviet european countries , but somthing tells me the actual economies are so different the Euro was always going to be problem.

We are an island , its nice to holiday in europe and visit , but in the end thats about as much as I want to do , this no boarders assett ownership big corp monopoly just seems unworkable .

11 March 2010 at 17:06  
Anonymous Mikec said...

De Gaulle was very wise when he said 'non'. He knew that anglo-saxon and EU are/were incompatible.

Most of the nation are waiting for an opportunity to shrug off the EU.

It is expensive, it is dishonest, it is lazy and it is self serving.

But unfortunately it is the sole provider of shelter for failed and crooked politicians....

Oh and, why was Cullen buried for 100 years?

11 March 2010 at 17:33  
Blogger Road_Hog said...

Cast Iron Dave won't do anything, he'll be busy right now working out how he can dodge this one. Dave's a disappointment, a complete let down, a liberal, pro-EU Green Tax enthusiast. And the Conservatives are still wondering why their lead in the polls continue to shrink, despite being up against McDoom. It's because the electorate have realised it is either NuLabour or BluLabour, why bother. Vote UKIP or save yourself a trip to the election station.

11 March 2010 at 17:41  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dave would have to make a promise of a referendum into a LEGALLY BINDING contract with the people for me to vote for him.

After his cop-out over Lisbon, I do not believe that he really has what it takes to even attempt stand up to the EU, let alone take power back from it!

11 March 2010 at 19:14  
Anonymous William Wallace said...

Let me try to get my little head round this one.

The British , by referendum , will be offered a say on a Treaty amendment to an aspect of mechanisms governing the eurozone, of which eurozone, they are not part?

And you tories think that's democratic?

You'll be governing Scotland without a mandate next. Oh sorry, done that one.

11 March 2010 at 20:17  
Anonymous Old Grumpy said...

@William Wallace

Personally I'd be quite happy to see Scotland go her separate way tomorrow morning. Sooner, if possible. Be well, and be happy. England is as fed up with Scotland as vice versa. Go, and good riddance. It was a good marriage - perhaps - whilst it lasted, but it's time to split. Have you noticed that the Scots call Scotland Scotland whereas the English still tend to call themselves the UK? Speaks volumes, just the same as only the Serbs continued to talk about Yugoslavia when all the other parts of it had gone. The UK is a nice fiction but it's on borrowed time.

But my point is actually about the euro and the proposed treaty amendment. No, we're not a part of it....but we still b**ody well PAY for it, via the eu. Don't we? Yes. And it we pay for it, then we should have a say in it. QED. That's why it's democratic, mate.

11 March 2010 at 20:59  
Anonymous William Wallace said...


Is there someone else?

I cannot quite see how the poor, hard done by English pay for the Euro? Or why you should be permitted a vote on something connected thereto.

11 March 2010 at 21:05  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think that Mr Cameron just wants the whole EU thinggy to go away.
Mr Brown is the man who pinched the pensions, sold the gold, signed the Lisbon Constitution secretly when nobody was looking and who bankrupted our rich little country.
Nick Clegg is definitely going to reduce taxation with swinging cuts and also going to spend a lot of money on taxing the rich and giving more to the Welfare State.
So who would you choose?

11 March 2010 at 21:06  
Blogger Lakester91 said...

Surely there is no real reason that we cannot have a referendum as to whether we should un-ratify the Lisbon treaty. If the current government can remove such ancient and fundamental principles such as trial by jury and double jeopardy, then they could easily make this unpopular and undemocratic treaty (constitution) go away. I fear that Cast-Iron Cameron wanted to have his cake and eat it too. Pretend that he was willing to hand the decision to us, whilst knowing fully well that the constitution would be ratified before any election. That way he could get support as a euro-sceptic, while standing by and claiming that couldn't do anything about it when it is passed without referendum.

11 March 2010 at 21:20  
Anonymous no nonny said...

Lord, how I detest that blue and yellor rag.

11 March 2010 at 23:25  
Anonymous no nonny said...

- yellow - sorry.

11 March 2010 at 23:26  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is it about the Tory faithful like Cranmer to be so delusional?

11 March 2010 at 23:35  
Blogger Anabaptist said...

As I have said in a previous post, David Cameron has no attachment whatsoever to Conservative principles or ideas. His leadership of the Tory party is merely the vehicle for him to pursue his left-liberal agenda. Having hijacked the Tory party, he hopes to woo some conservative votes by making a few very weak-kneed promises about free schools and academies, and he tries to position himself as appearing to support the traditional family (support that on close investigation vanishes like a puff of smoke).

He has already shown himself to be completely untrustworthy, so even if he were to appear to seize the opportunity presented to him by the EU's latest power grab, I would simply not belive him.

11 March 2010 at 23:44  
Blogger Lakester91 said...

Seconded. I've yet to see any difference between the two main parties that is anywhere near big enough as to vote on. If the Conservatives took a risk on upsetting secularists by allowing Christians to worship freely, or upsetting socialists by renewing their commitment to tiered education, or upsetting gaia worshippers by investing in manufacture then I'd consider voting Tory. However he is just another Blair clone who is far too willing to be bent to the will of the loudest minority (e.g. Homosexual lobbyists). If he were a true Conservative then they'd win by a landslide.

11 March 2010 at 23:55  
Blogger Road_Hog said...

"What is it about the Tory faithful like Cranmer to be so delusional?" It is like having your best friend stab you in the back. The realisation is jut too difficult to accept. You just can't believe someone you trusted would do that to you, it is easier to go into denial than face the truth. Cameron, the man that snatched electoral defeat from the jaws of victory. RIP UK, you sold us out Cameron, just like Brown.

12 March 2010 at 01:05  
Anonymous Atlas Shrugged said...

As I have said in a previous post, David Cameron has no attachment whatsoever to Conservative principles or ideas.


Cameron has every attachment to Conservative principles and ideas imaginable.

For the leader of the Conservative Party IS effectively Conservative Party principles and ideas. Long has this been the case, as any one close to the top of the Conservative Party will reluctantly assure you.


How much, if at all, Conservative Party principles and ideas reflect conservatism is quite a different matter. Deflect, would be a more accurate.

Conservatism is clearly defined as being a guiding set of ever adapting selectively conserving principles.

Conservative Party policies are what ever the leader of the Conservative Party for one reason or another decides they are going to be. Exactly the same thing could and should be said about the leaders of the Labour or Lib/Dems Parties.

What a political Party apparently stands for, and far more importantly actually does in power, has infinitely more to do with perpetuating the establishments established or much preferred ORDER, then the public will ever be allowed to fully understand.

What is worse.

If the misguided sheople have not worked-out what is undoubtedly the establishments ever more cruelly deceptive game of one-sided monopoly by now, especially after the last two years, they never will.

Taking various establishment created ideologies at face value ( which is always a highly dangerous thing to do ) they all seem to have one thing in common. They are all almost all things, to almost all men.

In practice they all serve the particular long term needs or current requirements of the exact same ESTABLISHMENT.

The establishment is represented by many things at the top of society. Like for example the educational, scientific, military, and mind control ( The entire MSM )establishments.

However the thing to remember, in fact never allow yourself to forget, is that this subordinate, blood-sucking, and largely parasitical level of the establishment has ALWAYS been either directly or otherwise controlled by a far higher ones.

These higher levels of the establishment are wholly represented by the utter might and almost complete power of THE WORLDS financial establishment. Working in differing degrees of harmony, with the VERY VERY top of THE WORLDS religious establishment.

Put another way.

Much may have seemed to have changed since classical or medieval times, regarding who is really running the show. However in reality things are run essentially the same way as they have always been.

Please note that I do not name names at this point, as those that have in the past swiftly realised that doing so was an extremely dangerous, or indeed a suicidal thing to have done. Although working out the names of these people, all by your little old self, is a very easy thing to do.

Please note the word 'people', not lizards, any other reptilian, or alien species.

12 March 2010 at 02:00  
Anonymous Atlas Shrugged said...

In all ages, in all lands, there have been those who seek truth. This seeking is an individual's search for something more than self, and much more than the confines of this worldly system. It is the seeker, who understands there is more than what meets the eye, who is not afraid and makes the choice to go into the unknown.

However, the establishment are very well protected by the well documented and long established fact that;

There has always been a vast majority, who would not wish to see the truth, even if it was the size of a perfectly gigantic heard of wild elephants, that had taken up long term residence in their own living rooms.

12 March 2010 at 02:23  
Blogger mike said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

12 March 2010 at 02:38  
Anonymous Tancred said...

All he has to do is promise a referendum on the EU, promise to repeal the Human Rights Act, expel all the bogus asylum seekers/illegal immigrants, stop all third world migration/ Islamisation and tackle crime, drugs, education and the NHS and he would have a landslide.

The problem for him however, and the reason he will not, is simple.

The Tories are just New Labour Lite.

They dare not promise the public what they crave - that would not be Liberal Democracy - just plain old Democracy.

And we can't have that sort of nonsense now can we old chap!

12 March 2010 at 06:37  
Anonymous bluedog said...

Your Grace, if this German initiative is an opportunity for Dave it is also an opportunity for Gordon. Never under-estimate a cornered rat. Isn't Brown is sufficiently venal to declare a Labour lead referendum and take the UK out of the EU in the interests of his own career?

12 March 2010 at 07:12  
Blogger Anabaptist said...

My mistake. I meant, and should have written conservative rather than Conservative.

12 March 2010 at 07:16  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think it highly unlikely Cameron will grasp the nettle and give the people a say.

Especially if Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons Alan Haselhurst is quoting the offical party line when referring to the 1975 referendum on the EEC, sold to the people by Heath as a trading block with no loss of sovereignty, he states that

"The people were given a say on that original decision and the result was emphatic".


"I certainly do not believe that it would be in the best interests of the British people for the UK to leave the European Union".

12 March 2010 at 11:16  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are differently worded versions of the Tories' referendum pledge, and it wouldn't be too difficult for them to construct an argument that it didn't apply in this case. Especially if the necessary treaty amendments were put into a protocol attached to an accession treaty, eg for Croatia, as promised to the Irish regarding their "guarantees".

12 March 2010 at 11:48  
Anonymous De Rigueur said...

Ah, of course that's why Sarkozy is over here, having a chat with Gordon and Dave!

He's trying to warn them off.

Should be interesting as this rolls out.

Or perhaps ......he's Just here on a jolly with his mistress.

12 March 2010 at 16:41  
Blogger peter_dtm said...

if do nothing dave would announce an eu referendum to be held within 50 days (before a new budget even) then I am sure he would get a landslide.

if he'd dump the green fascist nonsense as well and he'd get long term loyalty as well.

but no referendum and buying into the eco fascist lies leaves me with no other recourse but to vote either bnp or ukip...

12 March 2010 at 21:57  
Anonymous Old Grumpy said...

@ William Wallace 21.05

Many thanks for your reversion above.

We, that is, the present "UK" (and therefore, Scotland as well as England) pay for the eu (and all its horrible works) through our VAT contributions which go straight to Brussels. I presume from your post that you may not know this.

It's a slightly different point to the one about the possible fragmentation of the UK, of course. therefore the "hard done English" are in fact identical to the self-save "hard done Scottish" insofar as the eu is concerned.

You guys north of the border are paying for the euro just the same as the English, in other words....whilst the UK exists as a whole.

And so I repeat my point that as the UK is funding the eu to a greater rather than a lesser extent, the UK deserves to have a say in how that money is spent....whether it is propping up Greece, or what. If you're paying the dosh, then you should have a say in how it's spent. I don't know I can put it any more clearly than that.

Is the point made now, good Sir?

As regards Sscotland's "independence" I don;t have any argument with you, really I don't.....because you want Scotland, I feel, "released from the English yoke" (forgive me if I put it in those terms, but that's normally what I feel Scots Nats feel to be the case) and, frankly, I couldn't agree more. S*d off with you, if that's how you feel about the Union. So we're really singing from the same hymnsheet in that area.

I also think that "independence" from England would be an illusion, since Scotland would still be tied into the eu evil empire just the same, but I have the impression, after speaking to numerous Scots Nats, that they don't care, just so long as Hadrian's wall is rebuilt to keep the English out.

Fair enough, I agree that from the Scots perspective Scotland has had a raw deal in many respects from the Union, but it's also had a lot of advantages as well. If the UK hadn't existed, then what would have happened to BOS and RBOS last year? Could Scotland have funded them? Of course not. But these points butter no parsnips, and never have. English money has been used in billions to prop up these failed Scottish banks, and we don't even get a thank you. The only way to deal with the problem is complete independence, and see how divorce goes. Many Scots Nats would prefer ruin and penuary rather than the UK to exist, and a fair enough view, of course, at that. That's politics, after all.

Do have a great weekend, Mr Wallace, Sir. BTW, I do speak as someone who'd had great affection for Scotland, and spent most of my working life bringing tourists to it, for the benefit of the Scots, but once again I doubt if that cuts any ice whatsoever with the Scots Nats.. Many Scots Nats would say they'd prefer not to have the English contaminate the soil north of Berwick or Carlisle. The depth of hatred can be quite astounding at times.


12 March 2010 at 22:23  
Blogger Anne said...

Do you REALLY think a PM CAMERON would give the people a referendum?

First, I will ask YOU exactly WHAT do you think is the true End Game of the EU?

I recently looked to America, at its Constitution for at one time, it too had separate nation States.

I looked first of all to see how all the people were made just "Citizens of the USA. And here is just a little "Could it happen to us? Remember The United States as early as 1789 in Art. I, sec. 8, clause 4 of the Constitution of the United States it was provided: 'The Congress shall have Power . . . to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization. The right to enact rules dealing with naturalisation was granted to the Union, because otherwise the States of the Union might have developed different policies on naturalisation and immigration. In the early existence of the United States, other rules of nationality law, especially rules regarding acquisition by birth and loss of nationality were regulated by the different States, not by the Union. Only after the 14th Amendment (Section 1) came into force (in 1868) did the subject of nationality become governed by federal legislation."
Does anyone believe that the EU will not give 'itself' the power eventually? Will you be asked? Would any British Government ask you? The important bits for you to remamber when answering are, "Was you asked by Prime Minister John Major if you wanted to be an EU Citizen? Was a referendum held for you to vote on? So, I ask again, could an/or would the EU make us ALL REAL EU Citizens of the EU?

The USA became a United States of America, but the way the deeper and more meaningful integration into the EU is going, I would suggest the EU would become just one State. So, let us look once more to America?

“The USA Constitution is silent on the issue of the secession of a state from the union. However, its predecessor document, the Articles of Confederation, stated that the United States of America "shall be perpetual." The question of whether or not individual states held the right to unilateral secession remained a difficult and divisive one until the American Civil War. In 1860 and 1861, eleven southern states seceded, but following their defeat in the American Civil War were brought back into the Union during the Reconstruction Era. Following the Civil War, the United States Supreme Court, in Texas v. White, held that states did not have the right to secede and that any act of secession was legally void. Drawing on the Preamble to the Constitution, which states that the Constitution was intended to "form a more perfect union" (Try ‘ever closer Union’-my comment) and speaks of the people of the United States of America in effect as a single body politic, as well as the language of the Articles of Confederation, the Supreme Court maintained that states did not have a right to secede. However, the court's reference in the same decision to the possibility of such changes occurring "through revolution, or through consent of the States," essentially means that this decision holds that no state has a right to unilaterally decide to leave the Union.”

Now ask yourselves, are you sure the EU would never do this? Is this what YOU want? Will you be ASKED? Are you sure?

14 March 2010 at 22:57  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why has it all gone quiet on this Blog?

20 March 2010 at 16:49  
Anonymous Anne said...

Lisbon gave the EU the ability to make Treaties without having to go through National Governments.

David Cameron can promise all he likes but he may not be given the chance to deliver any Referendum.
If he is asked as Leader, what do any of YOU honestly think he will do? So, Is a promised referendum at this stage, a CON?

23 March 2010 at 22:52  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older