EU Referendum: The question that refuses a straight answer

Backbencher October 10, 2012 4
EU Referendum: The question that refuses a straight answer

By Tom Hagen

In recent weeks, there has been constant background noise in political circles about a possible referendum on the European Union. First, we’re told the Conservatives will promise it as part of their 2015 campaign. Then we’re told even Labour want to promise one for their next general election manifesto. It might have been the other way round, but what does it really matter? Dan Hannan MEP was keen to highlight how Clegg’s chart-topping apology for failing to live up to a pre-election pledge doesn’t talk about his promise on Europe.

 

All this tells people like me is that all three main parties are part of the same contemporary European aristocracy. They’ll say anything to keep the scam running. They’ll make any promise, they’ll feign sincerity and apologise, they’ll tell outright lies; they’ll even sell their own mothers to retain power and keep ‘the project’ alive. The fact of the matter is that none of these three crooked parties will ever give us a referendum.

 

For too long, though, the national discourse in the United Kingdom has, in my opinion being completely off the mark. From Paddy Ashdown talking complete nonsense on the BBC’s Question Time show to heated discussions between us proletariat about whether we’ll suffer a cheese and wine drought if we did happen to leave the EU.

 

My argument is very simple; It is straight to the point: being part of the EU is a threat to our freedom and liberty. It is a Mafioso-style organisation operating the mother of all protection rackets.

 

Our existence in this political union is undemocratic for a number of reasons. No vote has ever been carried out as to whether we want to remain part of the gigantic, over bearing, sovereign eroding authority that the union resembles today. The only (almost forty year old) referendum which took place was one that most sane people would have supported in the circumstances – effectively presented as a free trade agreement to increase commerce, prosperity and by extension, peaceful co-existence on mainland Europe. I’d still like that to remain when we leave the union.

 

Since then, though, the reality of our relationship with the union has changed drastically. The union now has power to fine us for not implementing its rules and regulations. In fact, EU regulations (as opposed to ‘directives’) are immediately enforceable in the courts of a ‘Member State’. One would imagine in a democratic country, this would be reason alone for another referendum to be called. Ceding our sovereignty is not an insignificant issue and it’s about time the politicians stopped treating it as one.

 

Regulations, directives etc. passed through the EU’s legislative process can only be initiated by ‘the commission’. Does it really get any more Mafioso than that? A completely unelected, solely appointed body of bureaucrats from each member state. Effectively it is someone nominated from the political establishment by other politicians. The UK has people like Peter Mandelson representing it. Need I go on?

 

The real irony about this is that the most vocal supporters of the continuation of this political union, across the continent almost invariably insist on being described as ‘progressive’ and ‘liberal’. Here is a very good example of a Franco-German Green MEP, Daniel Cohn-Bendit ridiculing the Earl of Dartmouth for his archaic title – instead of answering his very simple question.

 

The clip shows something else too – the left wing, statist establishment are gloating at what they perceive to be the deterioration of our global influence. Our dependence on the EU for trade (over 40% of exports up until very recently) has created an economic threat for our nation that needs to be addressed immediately.

 

I often hear from supporters of the union that the lack of democracy will be reformed in the long term and that it will increase representation, prosperity and the like across Europe. My retort is simple: take a look at Greece and Italy where we had the EU trying to stop elections and appointing their own technocrats to run the country. Democracy, like we’ve never seen before. The type of prosperity money simply can’t buy. Youth unemployment rates not even Gordon Brown is capable of and continuous riots and looting sprees that put the thugs of London to shame.

 

There are countless other reasons to oppose membership of, or even the existence of a European Union. I could go on about its direct costs, the unaudited and bloated budgets, the incompetency of its various institutions – not least the European Central Bank, the very specific effects of its inability to refrain from incessantly imposing new rules to control every aspect of our lives. But they all pale in comparison to the issue of democracy and freedom. How can this organisation be trusted? Time and time again, it has infringed on the rights of those it claims to govern with complete benevolence. It has a proven track record of failure.

 

More importantly than the referendum question with which I began, I fear that federalism is going to creep in through the backdoor. Ever since the inception of the economic crisis, pro-European politicians have, largely with the exception of our Kraut cousins, consistently argued for ‘greater union’, ‘greater integration’, ‘a banking union’ and quite unabashedly ‘increased federalism’. They are putting forward their political fantasy as a possible solution, to exploit the financial strain under which the people of Europe are currently living under. This exemplifies the cold blooded, calculated enemy that we are up against. Politicians caused this crisis, yet they want us to hand them more power and more of our wealth to dissipate.

 

The European Union is a distant authority with way too much power. It is out of touch and it is out of control. It must be stopped.

Reddit this article ↓

twitter