There are reasons why Part 3 won’t alter behaviours but it will cause people to shut it out and send this blog to Coventry:
1. People have their own agendas and though the first two parts of this article might make sense, someone like Jailhouse Lawyer, for example, will still support the EU because it supports prisoner’s votes. He said as much in comments on Part 1.
I won’t be signing up, but I do kind of wish you success, because a referendum could settle the issue, at least for a significant time.
Up here in Scotland many people have a different perspective, because we have had so many years of living with a dominant and bossy neighbour (even when we do provide plenty of the politicians overseeing that dominance), so for us a referendum would be a choice between being dominated by England even more, or dominated by Europe, rather than the English choice of being dominated by Europe or being free (apart from subsidising Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, some of you would claim), and I think I prefer Europe.
2. You can’t attack someone close. You can attack Gordo or the EU or any organization that is not going to hit back but try “outing” a fellow blogger [e.g. in 2007] and you never hear the end of it. “Not done, old chap.”
This Part 3 does precisely that – it doesn’t bite the hand that feeds it but it does bite plenty of politicians and pundits, including fellow bloggers, let alone the people themselves, in all their naivety and laziness, i.e. they won’t read the literature or they read the wrong literature. An example is the person who reads the newspaper and IPCC reports and just accepts them uncritically.
The bottom line, as stated, is that you can’t attack someone close. Attack twenty people close and you have a war on your hands or complete ostracism, something Tory bloggers are doing with me at present.
# State of play
What we have are a number of players:
1. The EU and its agenda, as stated in Parts 1 and 2. In with them are lumped Gordo and all the global socialists and these people are determined, shady and are drawing on the vast experience of their forebears [e.g. the Venetians] in how to foment unrest and make a profit from the spoils. To them, the common man is an object of derision.
2. Fellow travellers who see the EU as supporting them but actually will see them treated as pariahs when the time comes and/or thrown back into prison. You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, no matter how smooth the sow’s ear might seem at the time.
3. Those whom Dante reserves for the deepest pit of Hell, frozen in a river of ice. You won’t find Gordo in this group because he is an “open traitor” to the country, a person that even the Chinese make fun of.
Gordo is already for the 1000 years in the pit of fire, where there is a weeping and gnashing of teeth.
This third group though are those who purport to support democracy and vaguely libertarian principles and then abandon them and go off on some completely different tangent which destroys any chance of progress being made. Either they are naive, don’t understand UK politics or they are shills who fly false flags, to trap the unwary and needy. I don’t purport to try to discern which are which.
These include people of influence too whom many saw as fighters for freedom and for the common man but in fact … they are anything but.
4. The misled. These poor souls follow people in N3 and find, later, that they’ve been led up the garden path. Poor sods.
5. The oblivious – the vast majority out there who will vote in this government or that and whose politics are the hip pocket.
6. The type of person who is writing to you now, soon to be labelled an insurgent and subversive and in a nice counterpoint, even labelled a traitor.
So, we may as well get started on this.
# Tory stance
Dave said and let’s quote him from May 26th, 2009:
We will therefore hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, pass a law requiring a referendum to approve any further transfers of power to the EU, negotiate the return of powers, and require far more detailed scrutiny in Parliament of EU legislation, regulation and spending.
The EU has a quiet word with him [no suggestion of any of the folding stuff changing hands – more likely a gun at the head] and hey presto, we get, through his minion:
And now William Hague has said it was “no longer possible” to put the treaty to a popular vote.
“Now that the treaty is going to become European law and is going to enter into force, that means a referendum can no longer prevent the creation of the president of the European Council, the loss of British national vetoes … These things will already have happened and a referendum cannot unwind them or prevent them.”
Of course, this does not go down well with true Conservatives:
Gerald Warner is less easy to please. Abandoning the referendum, he writes, is an “historic moment” because it sets a new paradigm in political chicanery: Cameron will become the first British leader to have ratted on his commitments BEFORE even taking office.
Now we get into the very substance of what this post is all about, why Tories who follow this tosh are in error, why the leadership of the former Witanagemot, now the English Free Press, is in error and why the current LPUK leadership has abandoned its principles.
As can be seen from Parts 1 and 2, the EU is a monster which is laying waste to this country. There are two reactions to this:
1. Let’s get the hell out of there now and this is why the Albion Alliance was born. This is why, at the Tory Conference, Lord Trimble called for an immediate renegotiation of the terms of the treaty and Conservative Home polls backed that up.
But there is NO renegotiating with Brussels. They have no history of it and all they will get from Dave is concessions, whilst appearing to give up sovereignty in some areas. If you look back at 13th Spitfire’s chart again, you can work out yourself which ones those will be.
This is why, at the Conference, the Freedom Association and their Better Off Out group argued so forcefully for getting out now.
The group is chaired by Lord Vinson and the administrative work will be done from the office of Philip Davies MP. Here is the list of members:
Douglas Carswell MP, Baroness Cox, Philip Davies MP, Nigel Dodds MP, Jeffrey Donaldson MP, Philip Hollobone MP, Baroness Knight of Collingtree DBE, The Earl of Liverpool, William McCrea MP, Dr. Ian Paisley MP, Lord Maginnis of Drunglass, Lord Mancroft, Austin Mitchell MP, Lord Monson, Lord Moran KCMG, Lord Palmer, Lord Pearson of Rannoch, Lord Quinton FBA, Iris Robinson MP, Peter Robinson MP, The Earl of Shrewsbury and Waterford DL, David Simpson MP, Dr. Bob Spink MP, Lord Stevens of Ludgate, Lord Stoddart of Swindon, Lord Swinfen, The Rt. Hon. The Lord Tebbit, Lord Tombs, Lord Vinson LVO DL (Chairman), Lord Willoughby de Broke, Sammy Wilson MP, Ann Winterton MP, Sir Nicholas Winterton MP
2. Unfortunately, there is a counter-movement, egged on by the Europhile lobby, which claims that we are currently in too weakened a position to have a referendum, particularly with Brown setting the questions. Everyone – Europhile and Eurosceptic alike – concedes that with the very nature of the British public, the phrasing of the question is critical.
Q: Would you like to see a strong prosperous Britain with the security and family values the EU can provide in these troubled times? Vote Yes. Would you like to see more of the instability, job losses and debt which we currently have in Britain? Vote No.
Naturally, in terms of Parts 1 and 2 of this article, that is hardly the question.
For that reason, the Cameron-Clarkes have gone back on their earlier promise and reneged on offering the people a referendum. Their notion [if you can believe their motives at all] is that the British people need “educating” over a five year period and then, at the end of that period, a referendum can be put.
Have these people not seen all the material from the first two parts of this article, in various other forms? Did they not hear Roger Helmer when he stated at the Conference [and I quote verbatim]:
The European Union works on the principle of occupied ground, never giving back powers, once subsumed but promising to give them back nonetheless, under the easel word “subsidiarity”, a largely meaningless term, designed to convince the unwary. Brussels, once in control of some aspect of legislation, never gives back, never budges.
Clearly Dave never heard that or else he is already in thrall to other forces and can’t afford to hear it. So, a supposedly astute politician who has centralized his party structure and also, supposedly, is getting feedback from all sorts of think tanks, including his own at the Conference, still comes out with this:
David Cameron will promise that an incoming Conservative administration would set up a new constitutional court to protect British sovereignty from encroachment from Europe. This is according to The Times, which is retailing details of the Boy’s briefing to Tory MPs this morning.
He told them that an incoming Conservative administration would immediately seek to pass a Sovereignty Act which would set up a legal body, similar to the German constitutional court, which would rule on future EU proposals. A senior member of the shadow cabinet told The Times: “Because we don’t have a written constitution we have been particularly vulnerable to depredation from Brussels.”
This is, of course, total bullshit. We have a written constitution now. It is called the Consolidated Treaties, as amended by the Lisbon Treaty, which takes precedence over UK law … and what remains of our constitution.
Ken Clarke, the shadow Business Secretary, is to hold secret talks in Brussels with Jose Manuel Barroso to assure the European Commission President the EU has nothing to fear from a Conservative government.
… and as part of that same report:
In November, Mr Cameron moved to reassure Brussels that, should he win elections in May, a new Conservative government would not trigger a “massive Euro bust-up” by holding a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, which had just been ratified across the EU.
The Tory leader also tried to defuse the Europe issue by saying that it would take at least five years to negotiate the return of criminal justice and employment powers from the EU to Britain.
And, just to cap it all, it seems that our masters in Brussels are so confident of their mastery that they will not let us, the British, give any preference to ourselves in selling tickets to the Olympic Games that we are paying for here, in what used to be our own country.
In short, if he becomes Prime Minister, David Cameron will have more to worry about than whether he imposed enough Cameron Cuties on the demoralised remains of the Tory grass roots supporters.
Glad someone sees that. A former Tory Councillor was particularly scathing about Dave’s poll position and his reneging on all he stood for.
# Other parties
OK, OK, you say – everyone knows the Conservative Party has been hijacked by the Europhiles so what can one expect except treachery from that quarter? And the people of Britain are showing, through polls, what they think of that.
That’s the once-great Tories, it’s not even necessary to mention Labour any more, the Lib Dems are at daggers drawn but one would have expected LPUK to have stood tall and represented the interests of libertarians, freedom lovers everywhere.
Not a bit of it.
At their 2009 conference, their new Leader announced that he believed that we should not revisit this [an EU Referendum] for 5 years or so, bringing his party into line with the Cameron-Clarke hijacked Tories.
Their current Deputy-Leader then came out with this:
With respect I told you [meaning Higham] that a one issue pressure group such as the Albion Alliance over Europe was too early, too public and not going to get any traction. The big two and a half are going to pretend that they can get away with running things as usual- when the political reality is that the storm is yet to break, when butskillism finally fails.
The EU is an issue, where we disagree is that it is not THE issue, if that is the way you honestly feel, you need to be members of UKIP who are totally focussed on the EU to the exclusion of everything else. Unfortunately their policies as proved under Pearson are largely old school Tory Authoritarian.
If you are trying to build a cross party consensus, don’t alienate potential supporters to your cause. The LPUK is regrouping after an intial burst of enthusiasm, and dealing with reality not pie in the sky aspirations.
Pie in the sky aspirations?
Wanting this country to escape what is happening to them [see Parts 1 and 2 of this article]?
It is not THE issue?
With this government and the next one in no position whatsoever to renegotiate with the EU and even as we speak, the noose is tightening further in the sphere of courts of justice?
Autonomous Mind, one of the last of the true patriots, answered this and the subsequently ridiculous addendum that we are obsessive and quixotic in wanting a referendum:
It is not ridiculous to say that the UK is under EU control. Any business where 80% of the shareholding is owned by one person/group is under their control. So it is with the EU, which is the origin of around 80% of our laws and regulations.
I would not call myself obsessive about the EU. But realistically, it is not possible to fix a multitude of problems this country has if Parliament does not have complete political sovereignty. We cannot act in our own best interests when we have to conform to European models that are alien to us.
So the EU issue has to be priority one if we are to resolve the other problems. That’s why it keeps surfacing as an issue.
Quite frankly, the current LPUK leadership has sold its soul to the Europhile Tories so they might as well just join them. Meanwhile the people, as they always have been, are being sold down the gurgler and Libertarians need to find themselves a new party.
Has the current Deputy Leader never heard of grassroots action and the voice of the people? Does he think that a Westminster and EU which is never challenged will somehow become good little people and hand back their powers? Does he really believe we can trade ourselves back into a strong position whilst under the EU yoke?
Let me leave the question of LPUK with their new Leader’s own words:
I guarantee that this Bill will be quietly smacked down, but bravo to Douglas for trying. Cameron’s reaction should be interesting too: I wonder how long it will take the massively-foreheaded freak to engineer Douglas’s deselection…?
2. On the policy which Cameron claims is Eurosceptic, the LPUK leader first [correctly] lists this:
* No referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
* No referendum on Dave’s renegotiation proposal, i.e. something that would give Dave a strong bargaining position.
* No referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU—the very proposal of which would give Dave an even stronger bargaining position.
* A policy for repatriation of powers that wouldn’t fool anyone who knows anything about how the EU operates for more than 5 and a half seconds.
* No attempt to even bargain for repatriation of powers for “some years”—by which time the Tories hope to have their feet nicely under the table so that they can tell the EUsceptics to bugger off.
… and even prefaces this with:
Eurosceptic: my fucking arsehole. Pragmatic and achievable his policy may be—Eurosceptic it most certainly is not.
Now you would conclude from that [and note I didn’t dip into old posts from 2008 or earlier, when the political landscape was admittedly a bit different] that the new LPUK leader would be a key signatory. Clearly he believes in a referendum, on the strength of what he’s written.
Not a bit of it.
The very policy attacked in these posts is the one his party has adopted under his early leadership.
# UKIP and Lib Dems
WTF is the campaign leadership playing at?
While their PPCs put country before party and commit to a referendum on the EU, the leadership itself [not including Nigel] is being most untransparent and shows no inclination to work with other groups who are pursuing the same goals. The UKIP PPCs are good people, along with certain Tories who have defied the whip and various Lib Dems who seem to suffer the same problem we do [the Conservatives] – two parties in one.
Some of the best people out there are Lib Dem PPCs and some of the most virulently stupid are also Lib Dems.
# Power 2010
One good thing the LPUK leader did though was to expose Power 2010. This is a group that pretended to want to know the views of the people of the UK and then applied its own little filtering system to the issues people thought were important, on the grounds that there were so many issues submitted, they had to cull the majority of them.
Cull the call for an EU Referendum, with from 53% to 83% of respondents to a wide range of surveys saying they wanted one? It doesn’t even make it into the Top Ten issues?
Has anyone ever heard the words “false flag’ and “shill”? Not an important issue, guys? 13th Spitfire offers this graph:
This graph shows something very interesting, it shows how people’s attitude towards leaving the EU has changed over the years. The graph is constantly updated and the data sets used can be found here. As the trend currently stands, the clever British public can spot a quisling when it spits them in the face.
# English votes on English laws
Only one thing to say on this:
RT: @GuyAitchison: Eng Votes on Eng Laws has crept up into third place on power2010 leaderboard thanks to campaign by Devil’s Kitchen, Kingsnorth & others…
Well, one more thing. I’ll be toddling on over soon to sign up to this utopian notion, a great notion in itself but sadly doomed to failure in the current situation within the EU.
As for the Cameron-Clarkes’ position on English Votes – yep, another U Turn, prompting Daniel 1979 to exclaim:
WTF is David Cameron doing? He really is trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory – it’s not like he was heavy on the policy in his early years as Shadow Leader, but it seems just about every Tory policy he has announced over the years is subject to revision or reversal. With so few policies for those of us who advanced the Conservative line to use*, you would absolutely think he would at least get right the one’s he announced. Sort it out Dave!
It’s all so dispiriting, isn’t it?
No one in key positions seems to be supporting the people of the UK and certainly not supporting the English. In fact, the business of Cameron’s U Turn on English Votes shows English Nationals what’s in store if and when Dave gets into power.
Even that is not a shoe-in.
# Hung parliament?
Yet there is, to my mind, an even bigger reason. I have long been a supporter of the British preference for single party majority government. Reluctantly, I have changed my mind. As a recent report from the Better Government Initiative makes plain, the UK’s government has been the author of a flood of ill-considered, media-driven initiatives. Almost nothing is properly thought out. This is the result of the domination of a handful of people over the machinery of power, unchecked by party, parliament, bureaucracy or any other tier of government.
Coalition government would make this change in desirable ways. So do I fear a hung parliament? Not at all. It would force the next prime minister to persuade some truly independent colleagues. Given the task ahead, government by whim and by whip is just not good enough.
I’m not going to draw any. You can draw your own from what you’ve read in these three parts of the article and from what you’ve read elsewhere.
I’m not even going to promote the Albion Alliance at the end here. You’ll no doubt make up your own mind which way to go concerning the parlous state of the UK at this time, what is the single greatest cause of it and how it can be swiftly resolved.
Friday’s New Statesman carries a ComRes poll that will make interesting reading for David Cameron. Three quarters of his prospective parliamentary candidates want to renegotiate the UK’s relationship with Europe “as a matter of priority”. And 91 per cent favour a cap on immigration. Meanwhile, only 28 per cent believe that the next government should legislate to make people behave in a “greener” way.
2. I didn’t name certain people themselves above but rather their position in their party. It’s not the persons I take issue with [both are friends] but the political direction.
3. I did think Nigel’s comment to Rumpy Pumpy was a bit OTT. Let’s keep it civil, even as we unleash the missile.