Posts Tagged 'Reform'

March of the delusional EUseful idiots

Why should the media subject us to what people like Lord Wolfson have to say, when they spout such ignorant rubbish as this?

I think the most important thing is the principal – what is the EU there for. Is it a vehicle for greater freedom in Europe – free movement of capital, free movement of good, free movement of services, free movement of people?

Or is it a government of governments, a government above governments, a government without democratic licence, but the right to interfere in every aspect of our lives?

I think that is what it is becoming. I think over the last thirty years it has slowly changed itself and become ever more hungry for power.

The EU, in all its guises, has never been anything other than a governance construct designed to centralise power by removing it from nation states so that ordinary people cannot pursue ‘populist’ agendas that conflict with the continent’s elite.  It was not created as a free trade area in the way Wolfson and his pro-EU friends at Open Europe keep kidding themselves.

It has not been changing itself; it has merely been executing the centralisation plan that was always as the heart of the European project.  The EU mimics a state and is striving to function as one, and within a state – a single entity – movement of capital, goods, services and people is not constrained.  The four freedoms are just the by-product, not the objective.

A supposedly intelligent man like Wolfson would know this if he bothered to try to understand the entity he is saying should be reformed.  He either doesn’t know, or is simply misleading people for ulterior ends.  What isn’t made clear is what interest the EU could possibly have in reform when its decades-long plan to remove power from nation states has been progressing so effectively?  That’s an issue the ignorant Wolfson and delusional Open Europe never address as they continue in their roles of useful idiots for the benefit of the EU.

Business, the EU, ‘reform’ and the Age of Ignorance

And the Europlastics are at it again…

A survey of more than 1,000 business leaders, from companies of all sizes and sectors, has found overwhelming backing for plans for an in-out referendum on Britain’s place in Europe, with 66% in favour, reports the pro-EU Daily Mail.

The story goes on to add that a total of 56% of those surveyed feel that ‘meaningful change’ of the UK’s relationship with Brussels requires treaty change and a relationship based simply on trade against 23 per cent who don’t. 

This shows us once again how EU membership (a purely political issue concerning sovereignty and decision making) is being mixed and confused with membership of the Single Market (a purely economic issue concerning trade).  By conflating the two, the Europhiles maintain the lie that we have to swallow the politics in order to benefit from the economics.  Once again there is no discussion or examination of the other opportunities that would available to the UK if it left the EU, which could be far more beneficial.

With UKIP having departed the field where the EU membership battle is being fought – and focusing itself on ignorant immigration pledges, train lines and water usage in urinals and toilets, rather getting the UK out of the EU – the Mail turns for comment to its usual useful idiots, who still push the false option of EU reform and perpetuate the lie that our involvement in the EU (in all its previous guises) was only ever intended to be about trade.

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of Business for Britain, said:

It will come as a surprise to many that a nationwide and representative poll of business leaders finds a clear majority support EU treaty change and a return to a trading relationship.

The reason is clear – most business leaders think the costs of the Single Market outweigh its benefits. Now that business has spoken, the pressure is on the Government to get a better deal from Brussels and make life easier for Britain’s job creators.

There it is… ‘return to a trading relationship’ says Elliott.  A relationship that never existed.  Yet of course the truth must never be allowed to get in the way of an agenda.  If Elliott was serious about ‘reform’ he would explain that we got to this stage because the European project has only ever been about legal and political union. Economics and trade were used merely as strategic enablers, helping along the political aims while concealed in plain view.

Adding to Elliott’s misinformation, the Mail adds comment from Alan Halsall, co-chairman of Business for Britain and chairman of Silver Cross Prams, who said:

Business has, until now, been poorly represented in the debate on Britain’s EU membership. My own experience is one of overregulation combined with protectionism, even within the  Single Market, and we have therefore focussed on trading with the fast-growing markets in the Pacific region.

I often wonder why there aren’t more business people calling on the Government to make fundamental changes to our EU membership.

This poll demonstrates that I and hundreds of thousands of other UK business people are not alone in wanting to see a much better deal from Brussels.

Horse. Dead. Flogging.  The usual rubbish from the usual suspects.  The aim was always political so what need was there to engage business?

Then comes a classic illustration of the failure of business or the media to connect the dots or acknowledge the reality of how EU membership stops the UK from making international trade agreements, as the EU decides for the UK what the agreements will be and who they will be with:

The poll finds that British business is increasingly looking beyond Europe for new trade and would like the Government to do so too. By 58 per cent to 21 per cent British business leaders want to see the Government focus on the emerging economic powers like Brazil, China and India rather than the EU for future trading links.

Our trading links are dictated and controlled by the EU.  The government does not have the power or right to do anything.  With this being the case, why are these Europlastics banging on about reforming ‘Europe’ and its political project, when leaving the EU – perhaps adopting the Norway Option – would make the UK an independent nation state with autonomy that can free itself of the inward looking EU focus they say is holding them back?  Such stupidity.

The questions remain.  Why do these Europlastics continue to pursue the failing approach of shackling this country to a ‘middle man’ that only passes down to us for implementation decisions that have been made at a global level without our input and influence? 

How can they talk of being more outward looking, yet argue in favour of a settlement that means the UK still going without a seat at the real top table, and not having a voice on the committees and organisations where global decisions affecting trade across the globe with the very ’emerging economic powers’ British business is increasingly trying to build stronger ties with, are made?

We are clearly living in the Age of Ignorance.

When are spending cuts not spending cuts?

When it comes to Government announcements concerning the economy, be it a statement, the budget or a comprehensive spending review, a good rule of thumb is to wait until the dust settles and the facts emerge before rushing to comment.

The mainstream media doesn’t have the luxury of time as they have copy deadlines, so reproducing press releases and soundbites about George Osborne’s spending review without analysis is the order of the day – not any different to any other day when you think about it. But some blogs, that look beyond the headlines to look at the detail, can be relied upon to give us the story straight.

So, step up the ever reliable and news-breaking EU Referendum.

As Dr Richard North makes clear, public spending is not being cut at all in this spending review. The ‘cuts’ are to nothing more than reductions to forecast spending. The top line figures are completely clear. Public sector spending in 2010-11 remains as forecast at £696.8 billion. In 2014-15 public sector spending is now forecast to be £739.8 billion. That is an increase in public spending between now and then on £43 billion. How is this a spending cut?

What we are seeing is a massive redistribution of spending. It is a smoke and mirrors exercise. As EU Referendum makes clear, money will be spent on servicing existing and additional debt and patching some of the massive blackhole in pensions.

Tax increases will account for much of the additional spending. But the fact remains the state will not be shrinking, it will be bigger. The question now is, when will the media and the markets realise this? When that is answered, perhaps this damnable coalition managerialist spin operation in Downing Street will be asked how an increase in public spending of £43 billion is a spending cut.

It seems clear the ‘new politics’ is no different from the old.

Ken Livingstone wants to wage war on the wrong class

‘Forget the New Labour brand – now it’s back to what really counts: Class’.  So says Ken Livingstone in a typically long winded diatribe against New Labour in the Mail on Sunday.  Livingstone opens his piece thus:

For the first time we have an Election which all three main parties have lost and so has the country.

For once, Livingstone has offered a correct analysis.  But it isn’t Livingstone’s outdated and damaging brand of divisive class warfare the country needs.  The only class war that needs to be fought is the one to defeat the political class and empower ordinary people.  What is needed is a fight against authoritarian statism, and reform that makes this country’s politics truly democratic while reducing the size of the state and putting power in the hands of the people.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

The reality and consequences of EU membership

In Europe, but not run by Europe?  If media reports are acurate, the reality and consequences of EU membership may have yet again been laid bare this weekend.  We are not part of the Euro currency.  But because our political class took it upon themselves to entwine us ever deeper into the EU’s structures – without the permission of the British people – our Chancellor has been instructed to present himself in Brussels to sign up to a ‘European stabilisation mechanism’.

This mechanism will saddle us with billions of pounds of liabilities to prop up Eurozone economies.  Britain will be unable to veto this latest EU wheeze as it will be rammed through under the ‘qualified majority voting’ system.

Just to put things into context.  It is Alistair Darling – member of a defeated government – who will be attending the meeting on the UK’s behalf.  The UK will be presented with pact which, even if rejected by Darling, will be forced upon us at potentially huge cost, by members of a currency that is not ours, thanks to the ‘tidying up exercise’ known as the Lisbon Treaty.  No doubt anyone complaining to David Cameron about this will be told again to stop ‘banging on about Europe‘ and reminded that little Nick Clegg adores the EU and he has to be kept happy is Dave and Sam are to move into Number 10 before the birth of their fourth child.

The UK should not have any liabilities to bailing out a Eurozone country. We have plenty of problems of our own and would need to borrow even more money in order to lend it to Greece, or Spain/Portugal in due course.  But then, this is what happens when you give up political sovereignty and allow an unelected and unaccountable entity to dictate your actions. This is what membership of the EU means. None of us voted for this.  We were denied the chance by Labour, the Liberal Democrats and, yes, even retrospectively by the Conservatives.

Those people who defended Cameron before the General Election by saying that the EU is way down the list of voters’ priorities might find that changes as voters increasingly come to realise that far from being a side issue, EU membership influences almost every area of government of this country – making EU membership a priority issue.

We cannot rely on Labour, the Lib Dems or the Cameron Conservatives to ask voters if they wish to restore our national political sovereignty and redefine our relationship with the EU.  So it is time for a new political movement that will honestly and properly represent the views of voters, offer real democracy and accountability and seek a binding mandate for major reforms, not the cosmetic political class stitch up that currently holds sway and fails so miserably to serve our interests.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

British libel laws isolating UK

Before creating Autonomous Mind I read an article in The Times that reported American newspapers and magazines may stop selling copies in Britain and block access to their websites because of our draconian libel laws.  This was not only disturbing, but annoying on a personal level because having a strong interest in US current affairs and sport, many of the newspapers considering such action are on my reading list, including The New York Times, The Boston Globe and the Los Angeles Times.

But while those papers still consider their next move, An Englishman’s Castle blog tells us that US magazine, the National Enquirer, has already taken action and blocked online access to web users in the UK in an attempt to prevent possible libel actions being brought in London.  We have now set off down a slippery slope where our laws are damaging our ability to gather news and information from around the world.

It is both ironic and embarrassing that largely because of this country’s archaic much abused libel laws that are in desperate need of reform, other states are being forced to take action to pass their own laws that render claims under foreign libel suits unenforceable.  California recently became the fourth US state to pass such legislation because while American courts allow the press to make mistakes as long as they have exercised due diligence and shown no harmful intent, our system can make the press pay a harsh penalty for even unintentional and corrected errors.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine


Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive