- 'A tidying up exercise':
Surely, the EU Constitution just codifies the rules as to how the EU
- Wrong. The EU Constitution does not define the limitations and extent of
EU power, in fact it cedes control over 40 areas of decision making to the EU.
But is not just another power grab. It also enables the EU to further expand
its power to unprecedented and virtually limitless proportions. In short, the
EU Constitution will accelerate the EU's legislative imperialism.
Stuart, the Labour MP who helped draw up the EU Constitution said that,
"the suggestion that the EU Constitution was just 'tidying up' is a silly
phrase best forgotten. Read
- A Constitution for an enlarged EU:
With the EU being enlarged to 25 member-states surely there is a need to
clearly set out the rules of the club?
- Wrong. The truth is that the quest for a constitution predates even the
EEC and its predecessor, the European Coal and Steel Community. It was a dream
of Coudenhove Kalergi, in 1931, when he wrote his book the United States
of Europe, and it was a central part of Altiero Spinelli's 'Ventotene
Manifesto', written in 1941 under the title Towards a Free and United
Perversely, the constitution - if it happens - will not resolve the
institutional stresses brought about by the enlargement of the EU from 15 to
25 nations. The core problems of trying to manage disparate nations, each with
their own agendas, remain. But that is hardly surprising. The constitution was
never intended to achieve this. Read
- How the EU Constitution compares to other
Were not more powers given away to Brussels by the Single European Act and the
- Wrong. The number of vetoes given away in the European Constitution is
more than twice the number given away at Maastricht and five times more the
number needed for the creation of the Single market. Read
- The Economic Costs:
Surely, Britain benefits from
membership of the European Union?
- Wrong. The direct cost of our EU membership, net of the funds we get
back from the EU, amounts to around £3 billion a year. But this is
fraction of the story. The Institute of Directors has recently published a
report EU Membership: What's the Bottom Line?. The conclusion of
economists is that when we add in the additional costs of the CAP and
regulation, membership is costing between 15 and 25 billion per year.
That's roughly £1000 for every family in the country.
- The Political Costs:
Will not Britain have more influence in
the world if we are further integrated within the EU?
- Wrong. The UK is global power. Through membership of international
bodies such as the UN Security Council, the G8, the International Monetary
Fund, the World Bank, NATO and the Commonwealth Britain is a major player
in world affairs. We do not need to join a European
Worryingly, however, under the EU's Common Foreign and
Security Policy Britain has lost its right to steer its own course in
world affairs. Javier Solano the EU High Commissioner, responsible for
Foreign Affairs, has responsibility in this area. Britain is also all
ready being pushed to give up our permanent seat on the UN Security
As a result of the European Commission setting the trade
policy for the whole of the EU, Britain, the fourth largest economy in the
world, has no influence over the World Trade Organisation. If we can only
negotiate for ourselves Britain can obtain better trade agreements perhaps
even become founder members of a global free trade association.
more, the EU's influence over Britain's own external relations is set to
- The EU and Democracy:
Europe does not threaten our
- Wrong. We increasing have little influence over what happens in our
own country. The European Union is an emerging Superstate. The
unaccountable and unelected bureaucrats of the European Commission make
62% of our laws. This figure will increase to 79% if we join the
EU Constitution. What is more, these laws have supremacy over laws made by
our own democratically elected Parliament.
Do not just take my word for
it: "This country quite voluntarily surrendered the once seemingly
immortal concept of the sovereignty of parliament and legislative freedom
by membership of the European Union ... as a once sovereign power, we
said we want to be bound by Community law." - Judge Bruce Morgan,
judgement in Sunderland metrication case April 9, 2001
Next will be a
European army, harmonised taxation and fiscal policy across the EU. Our
legal system will be abolished along with the traditional rights that
guarantee our liberty. A single European Superstate will then be
established through the EU Constitution and Charter of
Fundamental Rights. All this is inevitable with European integration. Read on...
- The EU Superstate:
Aren't the arguments that the
European Union is leading to a single Superstate just scare
- Wrong. It is scary but it is also true. Read on...
- Options for Britain
Britain has no alternative to EU
- Wrong. Britain is the fourth largest economy in the world; we do not
need to be part of a European Superstate. Besides there are positive
alternatives for Britain with no detrimental effects to our democracy and
ability to govern ourselves that should be vigorously
- The Economics of the euro:
The Government claims that Britain's economy will benefit from
replacing the Pound with the euro. Surely this is correct?
- Wrong. Arguments used in favour of EMU have always tended to express
issues in broad terms, with very few specifics. They are based on idealism
and economic ignorance, using lightweight arguments to mask what is really
a purely political project. They are easily countered. Read
- The Five Economic Tests:
Gordon Brown has the five economic
tests by which he will judge whether replacing the Pound with the euro is
in Britain's interests. Surely this means that he will make the best
decision for this country?
- Wrong. The only test that the Government is relying upon is whether
they can win a referendum or not. The Chancellor's so-called five-tests
are spurious indicators as to whether or not Britain is suited to
scrapping the Pound. Read
- The euro and Inevitability:
Surely, it is inevitable
that the Pound will be replaced by the euro?
- Wrong. The Government will have to ask the people in a referendum.
Which means that this cannot be done without your consent.
of Denmark, a country that is much smaller than Britain and more dependent
on trade with the eurozone, rejected replacing the Krona with the euro and
this is despite much undue influence from their own Government and a biased
media in their referendum. And the Danes are doing well outside. If they can
their independence so can we.
Britain has a choice and does not have to
accept ever-closer Union, the choice is for the British people and our
Parliament. The judgement in the Metric Martyrs case confirmed that
Britain could even leave the EU if it passed an Act expressly repealing
the Treaty of Rome.
- The euro's Success:
Has not the introduction of the euro been
- Wrong. Despite the promises made on its behalf Economic and Monetary
Union since 1st January 1999 has failed to produce any improvement in
unemployment or growth in the eurozone countries. The United Kingdom and
Denmark, who are outside of the euro, have on the contrary continued to do
much better in both these respects.
Britain should count its lucky
stars it is not in the euro. The euro has not lived up to its billing: Read
HOME | ABOUT | COMMENTATORS | EVENTS | FAQ | MEDIA CENTRE | CONTACT | SHOP | JOIN | DONATE
Founder President: The Rt Hon. the Baroness Thatcher of
Kesteven, LG, OM, FRS
President: The Rt Hon. the Lord Tebbit of Chingford, CH,
Vice-President: The Rt Hon. the Lord Lamont of Lerwick,
Chairman: Barry Legg
Director: Robert Oulds MA, Head of
Research: Dr Helen Szamuely, Washington D.C.
Representative: John O'Sullivan CBE
Founder Chairman: Lord Harris of High Cross,
Former Chairmen: Dr Brian Hindley, Dr Martin Holmes &
Professor Kenneth Minogue