Bluemerle

http://news.scotsman.com/opinion.cfm?id=946102007
Scotsman
Sun 17 Jun 2007
The Great Charlatan's poisoned farewell gift
GERALD WARNER

IT WAS wholly predictable that the snake-oil salesman who has been
running Britain for the past decade would seek to inflict one final
humiliation upon his country before he departed into the ignominy of
history. Tony Blair's instinct has always been for the low blow: by
leaving Britain trussed up in the toils of a European constitution, he
intends to have the last snigger.

Blair hates Britain; he always has done. The pageant of its history,
the order and dignity of its long-evolved constitution, its civilised
sense of hierarchy - all provoke deep resentment in this inadequate
personality, obsessed with greatness and achievement despite being
hopelessly ill-equipped to attain them. The man who has shredded our
ancient constitution is the boy who, at Fettes, constantly rebelled
against the status quo, demanding change for its own sake, always
predicated upon his own back-of-an-envelope schemes of incoherent
innovation.

The Great Charlatan is now preparing his exit in the same spirit.
Having achieved nothing and wrecked much (including Iraq) during his
sleaze-ridden 10 years in power, he intends to write one last message
in the sand by subjecting Britain to the domination of a European
super-state, as his supposed legacy. The embarrassment this will cause
Gordon Brown is a bonus; but the real agenda is finally to liquidate
the British society and culture into which he was born. It is like the
doomed Führer ordering the razing of Paris.

This week's European summit in Brussels threatens to be the most
shameful moment in modern British history since the fall of Singapore.
The ruling clique is set to sell the pass, by embracing the European
constitution in the guise of an "amending treaty". The whole loathsome,
totalitarian scheme to create a supranational state, which has already
been rejected by French and Dutch voters and would have been repudiated
by the British electorate if it had been given an opportunity, is being
imposed under another name.

This is not a conspiracy theory, but a conspiracy. The fortuitously
leaked letter from German chancellor Angela Merkel to her fellow heads
of government revealed that the plan is "to use different terminology
without changing the legal substance". In other words, since the
populations of Europe cannot be persuaded to vote for a European
constitution, it will be forced on them without any further referenda,
in the guise of an "amending treaty". What is being amended is the
vestigial national sovereignty still residing with member states.

Even without sight of the German chancellor's correspondence, we would
have known the truth from the terms of the so-called 'treaty'. It
removes the references to the EU flag and anthem that betrayed the
superstate ambitions of the constitution but, in Merkel's words, will
"preserve the substance of the innovations". The European foreign
minister may be renamed "spokesman", but the reality remains the same.

There would be a permanent EU president and the Union will have a
"single legal personality". A new voting system would deprive Britain
of one third of the blocking powers it presently has against damaging
new EU legislation. The scale of this surrender can best be measured by
recalling that, even at present, 25,000 European directives a year are
imposed on British subjects without so much as being rubber-stamped at
Westminster. To pretend that Britain, after the further erosion of
autonomy imposed by this treaty, remained a sovereign nation would be a
fantasy. So, what is the British government going to do about it?

"We welcome the fact that there is now a consensus around the UK view
that this should be an amending treaty," a government spokesman said.
Which translates as: "Gee, thanks, Angela, for changing the names -
it's really cool that you haven't called it the Fourth Reich, or
something like that, which would have been difficult to sell to the mug
punters at home here."

Turning on the green light more strongly, the spokesman helpfully
added: "No previous amending treaties have required a referendum." Does
it strike you that there is just one small element that is
conspicuously absent from this whole scenario? You know, the 'D' word -
democracy? The ruling elite of Europe is planning to absorb Britain
into a European super-state (so, no change there) and the British
ruling elite is assisting the project, cynically overriding the
ironically named electorate - an electorate whose powers will soon be
restricted to choosing the local dog-catcher.

This is a defining moment for Gordon Brown. Will he accept the fait
accompli that Blair leaves on his desk or will he tear up this infamous
instrument of surrender and assert British sovereignty? How can he do
the latter when, for all his sulking, Blair has dragged him into
complicity with President Sarkozy and compromised any stance he might
make?

The demand for a referendum will be irresistible, unless Brown is
prepared to show himself in favour of backstairs deals and inimical to
participatory democracy. Yet the presumption will be of the government
canvassing for a Yes vote on a treaty recently signed by a Labour prime
minister. In those circumstances, the inevitable rejection of the
treaty would be a slap in the face for Brown, a resigning issue and the
worst imaginable prelude for Labour to a general election. Gordon is
thirsting for authority and popularity, but Tony has poisoned the
wells. Brown already lacks a personal mandate: a lost referendum would
destroy him.

The clever money is on there never being a referendum; but that too
would put Europe at the top of the agenda at the next general election,
with the anti-European majority of voters in revanchist mood. The Tory
leadership, as unpatriotic and cynical as Labour, would nevertheless
have no alternative but to pick up the banner of Euroscepticism, or see
UKIP roll over its electoral heartlands in a blitzkrieg. The backlash
against the grammar schools gaffe has rattled the Blue Labour cuckoos
in the Tory nest: they would have to head off mass defections with
strong anti-European rhetoric.

eublues

Great stuff in the Scotsman - never heard of the author (sounds like Nigel).

Andrew Constantine

This may seem like grasping at straws, but I am hoping that this so-called amending Treaty will be the one event that finally causes the English people to say "Enough".

We need an effective Coalition of anti EU foces to campaign hard against it.

With a bit of luck some Tories MPs may now give up on Cameron and come out to campaign against membership of the EU.

Andrew Constantine

gimlet

Andrew wrote
If these tory MPs were really against the EU they would have either joined UKIP or formed their own grouping. They have not - why? Either the gravy is too good or they have no principles, or are they getting paid off?


My local MP Paterson has been demoted from agriculture to transport. He has seen all his hard work on writing policies on restoreing the right of the UK to reclaim its fishing grounds wasted - it is a policy dropped by Cameron. So why keep supporting a party that does not represent your principles.


In the same vain, MP D Kawczynski pretends to huff about policies that are a direct result of EU membership - post office breakup etc, but seems unable to understand it is a result of EU membership. At least he is honest and has stated that he wants to remain in the EU.

Mixed messages to joe public - fraudsters both of them. We should not entertain any tory MPs joining UKIP - they have had enough time - They are the enemy slurping gleefully from the Blair, Brown bowl.

eublues

Does anyone know if Warner's claim of 25,000 directives a year is right? (Is it a misprint?)