Another one to file away til later

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, 03 January 2005 12:50.

Around Spring 2006 British voters will be sent to the polls by the three-time election winner and Prime Minister of Smiles, Tony Blair, to vote on the proposed EU Constitution. Opinion is settled on the matter and entirely accords with the long-established two-thirds, one-third majority for Euroscepticism. So how will our internationalist PM and his new Master of the European Stage, that man of Brazilian passions, Peter Mandelson, ever persuade the British public to the contrary?

Well, reasoned argument is obviously out. Something stronger is required, something befitting a desperate elite. It has to be - can only be - threat. And the only threat that has any purchase on the public mind is that of the lonely and dire future awaiting Little England outside the loving embrace of Europe. There, Blair and Mandelson have a (softening) majority. There they have an outside chance of pulling off a truly astonishing victory.

So be ready for it: a No vote will irrevocably lead to Britain having to quit the Union and, thence, walk the narrow and dark path to national failure. That’s the line.

Well, just remember these words by Javier Solano reported today here:-

Javier Solano said it would not be “the end of the world” if Britain rejected the controversial treaty in a referendum, which is expected in spring 2006.

But he said it would pose questions about Britain’s relations with those countries that voted in favour of the constitution.

Mr Solano said the constitution would help an expanded EU operate more effectively, but a “No” vote would not mean Britain would be excluded from the European family.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, he added: “It would open up the question of the relationship of the UK with the other members of the EU that have voted ‘Yes’.

“That would be a very important moment in the history of the EU and in the history of your country.”

It will, of course, be a very important moment whichever way the country votes.

I fear this will be one of the last frank and truthful statements about the EU, the Constitution and its meaning we Brits will hear from the EU elite in the run-up to the referendum. Don’t forget it.

Tags: European Union

Comments:

Posted by Pericles on Mon, 03 Jan 2005 13:41 | #

Hi GW,

Borrowed from UKIP

14-12-2004

THE REALITIES OF EU MEMBERSHIP
By Jeffrey Titford MEP – Eastern Counties
UKIP European Parliamentary Whip

The European Union is about to interfere in another sacred aspect of our lives. This time it is the lawyer-client relationship that is about to be radically compromised by the European Commission’s Third Directive on Money Laundering. Under its terms, lawyers will be banned from acting for their clients without conducting extensive prior checks.

The Directive also requires lawyers to report their clients to the police if they believe they may be indulging in ‘suspicious’ transactions. The Directive also affects banks, who are required to create comprehensive worldwide registers of what it describes as ‘politically exposed persons’. The definition of a politically exposed person is worryingly wide ranging and includes those ‘who are or who have been entrusted with prominently public functions’. Also falling under this umbrella are family members and close associates.

Not surprisingly, various industry bodies are not happy. The Council of Bars and Law Societies of the European Union said: “Under no circumstances should the state dictate for whom a lawyer may or may not act”. Even the Treasury is raising concerns: “How are you to establish whether someone is politically exposed? It is one thing to ask whether someone is on a UN sanctions list, but how do you define a ‘close associate’ “. The obvious advice here is to be very careful in whom you confide your personal business. Their interpretation of a ‘suspicious transaction’ might be very different from yours.

————————————————————————————————————————

New Commission, Old Problems.

When my colleague Nigel Farage MEP recently rose to his feet in the European Parliament and denounced the new European Commission, he was vilified and threatened with legal action. Mr Farage had asked fellow MEPs whether they would ‘buy a used car from this man’, when he revealed that M. Jacques Barrot, had received an 8 month suspended sentence and was barred from elected office in France for 2 years, after being convicted in 2000 of embezzling FFR 25m (US$ 3.8m) from government funds by diverting it into the coffers of his party.

French President Jacques Chirac subsequently granted M Barrot a presidential amnesty, making it illegal under French law to even mention the conviction. However, Mr Farage felt it was right and proper that MEPs should be informed of the past of the Vice President designate, and used his speech in the Strasbourg chamber to do so.

Despite all this, the new Commission was voted into office by a wide margin. All the UKIP MEPs voted against but, naming no names, one Conservative MEP, who also represents the East of England, actually voted to support the Commission and his two colleagues, with great personal courage, abstained. Only one Conservative MEP in the entire country had the courage to vote against the Commission. It is small wonder that the vast majority of voters, who are EU-sceptic, despite what some politicians say, are utterly confused by the Conservative Party and find it very difficult to trust them.

Readers interested in more information about Jeffrey Titford MEP or UKIP can find it on http://www.jeffreytitfordmep.co.uk or w.ww.ukip.org

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 03 Jan 2005 17:00 | #

Pericles,

I hope you’re not a lawyer!

Down the last twenty-five years I’ve engaged many continental Europeans, including Greeks, in the Great European Issue - only to find that, for them, there was no issue. I found myself arguing for sovereignty while they proposed industrial modernity or explained the waning efficacy of the nation state.

We’ve got used to the brave Danes keeping us company of course, and we have some hopes for the German and Austrian peoples (on Turkey if not the Constitution). But there’s plenty of room for more.

Is the Greek public hearing any Euroscepticism at all yet?