Thursday, May 29, 2008

EU bans opposition as President Barroso bullies the Irish

The Daily Telegraph is sounding an alarm, but there are few who are taking much notice. Certainly, the BBC has not breathed a word, and will doubtless not do so until they can link it with division in the Conservative Party and portray them as a party unfit for government. But Bruno Waterfield’s article should have all libertarians quaking in their boots, for Brussels is intent on eradicating those groups who dare to oppose the great EU project, and is doing so in a devious manner.

The EU is simply attempting to change the rules which allow MEPs to form political groupings. Current rules permit 20 MEPs from a fifth of the EU’s member states to form a group, but Richard Corbett, a Labour MEP, is leading the charge to increase this threshold to 30 MEPs from a quarter of the EU’s member states.

The move would eradicate UKIP’s pan-European ‘Independence and Democracy’ grouping, and, of course, the largest and most pro-EU groups ‘would tighten their grip on the Parliament’s political agenda and keep control of lavish funding’. It will also scupper the Conservative Party's plans to divorce from the EPP, which was foundational to David Cameron's bid to become leader of the Party. While the separation has been kicked into the long grass of 2009, this battle will now re-surface on the run-up to the 2010 general election. The timing could not be worse.

The elimination of opposition is being proposed in the name of efficiency: “It would prevent single issue politicians from being given undue support from the public purse,” said Mr Corbett. “We want to avoid the formation of a fragmented Parliament, deeply divided into many small groups and unable to work effectively.”

This is curious negation of the precise reasoning behind proportional representation.

And conveniently, Mr Corbett’s proposals will also give the President of the Parliament sweeping powers to approve or reject parliamentary questions, such that any questions which dare to question the legitimacy of the whole edifice may simply be set aside. This is not so far removed from Soviet Communist tactics, where power was maintained not by the banning of elections, but by the outlawing of ‘fascist’ and ‘counter-revolutionary’ parties.

And one may see the practical outworking of this in Ireland, as campaigns are underway to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. José Manuel Barroso, the Commission President, has warned Irish voters that they will ‘pay’ if they reject the Treaty. He said: “If there was a ‘No’ in Ireland or in another country, it would have a very negative effect for the EU. We will all pay a price for it, Ireland included, if this is not done in a proper way.”

The proper way?

Ah, he means if the Irish do not give the right answer.

As seen in the referenda held in Denmark, France, the Netherlands and Ireland, any nation which dare oppose the infallible, fore-ordained agenda is set aside temporarily while the juggernaut continues. This is overt totalitarianism; they are no longer concerned with political union by stealth.

While the bullying of Ireland's voters is unsurprising, President Barroso’s comments are indicative of the arrogant ideology to which member states are now subject. The EU is, in his view, an ‘Empire' of which he he is presently the Emperor. It is his duty therefore to ensure that the EU’s agenda is fulfilled, whatever the cost.

Cranmer is, however, puzzled by the desperate measures, for if the Irish vote ‘no’ in a few weeks, the result will simply be set aside, and the referendum held again and again until the Irish yield the divinely-ordained ‘right’ result.


Blogger ultramontane grumpy old catholic said...

Your Grace

I am not anti-EU. I have worked with people from other member states on some small EC projects and appreciate their friendliness and professionalism. Significantly English is becoming more and more the common language, to the extent that I've heard a German delegate apologising for having to speak German in opening remarks (and he had to do this because German had the presidency at that time). The common language being english is an enormous advantage to the UK, provided that we in the UK take the trouble to speak it and write it correctly.

But when Richard Corbett says:
“It would prevent single issue politicians from being given undue support from the public purse,”

“We want to avoid the formation of a fragmented Parliament, deeply divided into many small groups and unable to work effectively.”

- my responses are:

i) Why are any european parliamentary groupings receiving money from the public purse? If MEPs want to form associations, let them do this on their own initiative. After all that's how our own political parties evolved.

ii) How can it be shown that the European parliament is working efficiently? I cannot think of anything they do. (If they refuse to approve the EU budget, the EC just ignores them). The parliament is a paper tiger.

iii)Why is it Mr Corbett's business if an MEP is elected on a single issue? This is supposed to be the business of the MEP's electorate. I can think of one MP at Westminster who has been elected on a single issue.

29 May 2008 at 12:50  
Anonymous the last toryboy said...

Well, I'm extremely anti-EU, and grow more so day by day as reports like this one pile up.

Its a nascent tyranny, and has apparently moved on from stealth to bullying.

29 May 2008 at 14:11  
Blogger Tomrat said...

Your Grace,

To brutalise an old adage a bit, Whom God(.) chooses to destroy (.)he(.) first sends mad apply here - the EU project cannot continue without unchecked expansion but it is fast becoming frayed under the pressure - all it will take is one potent answer from the electorate of a resounding no and the whole charade will come crashing down. What we are seeing from the president of a country which was the last to join democracy from fascism is a return to the same driving forces of both the soviets and fascists (fascolism, if you will). People are beginning to wake up to this; scales are being lifted from eyes all over and no amount of non-reporting by the BBC will stop it, only drive the BBC into the ground.

29 May 2008 at 14:18  
Blogger Jeremy Jacobs said...


The bullies will have their way for a period of time.

29 May 2008 at 17:54  
Anonymous Patrick Hamilton said...

Its like a papel bull being issued - you will do as I tell you. They usually came with thunder and lightening. Next came the burnings of those in dispute.
I myself was burned at 24 as I crossed doctrinal swords with a high head one. Nothing changes - only the faces.

Patrick Hamilton

29 May 2008 at 18:22  
Anonymous james w said...

The EU continues to be the elephant in the room that our politicians choose to ignore. A simple example: the current persecution of householders over rubbish collection is directly traceable to an EU directive. The EU not only has Napoleon at its head but has aroused a lot of little Hitlers in our council offices.

29 May 2008 at 18:46  
Anonymous hear o israel said...

i am reminded of the offer of free buns at my local cafe , everyone thought they had bargain until they relised the coffe was twice as much !!.

the Eu is now visibly becoming a respector of only its self , we can run our own country very well , we have educated men and women .
this power show is very mandelsonesque , but i think it had to come .The EU is now behaving like a political party , but not one that wishes for transparency or fully democratic functioning.

its suductions of money and false accounting are now as legendary as dick turpin .

some of its aims are noble and its has helped some eastern bloc countries realise there potential , but it is by means a supreme or perfect form of goverment .

this move to squeeze its critics is all abit too much the result of political incest , the quality and purpose of the origional animal , being made into bloated pug dog .

by all means a european council with diplomatic relations , but one that oversees a nations day to day mangement is an orwellian nightmare.

there is no guarentee of cost and judging by these ill thought threats no reason to believe it will bestow any quality that we could not with our efforts do for our selves .

as soon as it moved from the workings of a respectable association it was doomed unfortuantely it didnt run out of money at the same time !!

29 May 2008 at 19:16  
OpenID trevorsden said...

Well Ultra ... I AM anti EU and can see no reason why anyone should prevent anyone else forming a political grouping. its a bigoted sledgehammer to stop the conservatives forming one.

Why should anyone get paid to form a grouping anyway? this is just like the EU paying lobbyists to lobby it in the guise of 'consulting' - it then follows the policies of its preferred lobbyists.

Friendlily/professional people or not mr ultra this is corruption.

And we can thank American Films/TV for them speaking English.

29 May 2008 at 20:51  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older