Britain’s Suicide Note
Friday, 22 January 2010
This appeared in my email inbox this morning. It puts our position Vis-à-vis the EU succinctly.
Printed and Published by James Carver, Mill House, Nayland, Suffolk, CO6 4HU 01.01.10
Britain is to cease to exist as an independent nation and this has come about on a voluntary basis.
In other words, we, as a nation, are effectively committing suicide.
What have we given up?
We had the greatest empire the world has ever known and, having turned it into a Commonwealth, with The Queen as its Head, we subsequently turned our backs on its 54 countries, with a population of about a billion people, by abandoning Commonwealth preferential trade, in favour of the, so called, advantages of local trade in Europe.
We have also given up our own sovereignty, or the right to be an independent nation, with its people choosing their government and removing that government, when necessary. Instead, about 72% of our laws come directly from Brussels and are incorporated into our legal system without us being able to do anything about it.
Our politicians call this “sharing sovereignty” which is nonsense, as, like virginity, sovereignty cannot be shared! We have given up our democratic right to govern ourselves in favour of being governed by permanent, un-elected and un-removable bureaucrats, deciding our future from their headquarters in Brussels.
We have given up our financial independence and even sold two-thirds of our gold reserves at $280 per ounce, and switched into euros, to show solidarity, and loyalty, to our new masters, the European Union.
We now pay about £50m per day to those bureaucrats for the “privilege” of being governed by them.
Why did we do this?
Because our own British elected politicians did it for us without telling us what was happening, and hoped we did not notice until it was too late.
When did it start?
After the Second World War when we saved France, and the rest of Europe, from Germany under Hitler.
Who now governs us?
The EU, which is now run by France & Germany, since the Treaty of the Elysee on 22nd January 1963, whereby they agreed to be the heart of Europe, and have acted together ever since.
How did it all happen?
Jean Monnet, one of the founding fathers of the EU, explained it clearly, back in the 1950s, with these words: “Europe’s nations should be guided towards the super state without their peoples knowing what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually, and irreversibly, lead to federation.”
What was the starting point?
The European Coal and Steel Community, in March 1951— a single market amongst six countries in Europe, including Germany and France.
Next there was The Treaty of Rome in 1957
This set up the European Economic Community (EEC), known as the Common Market.
The Common Market sounds like economic co-operation only, but the treaty set up all the machinery of a single superstate, including a Council of Ministers, an executive Commission, a Parliament, a legal system based on continental law, and headed by a European Court of Justice, a Central Bank, and a tax system called VAT.
There was also a Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), although Fishing was not yet included. There was no way of changing any parts of the treaty unless all signatories agreed to do so.
The European Court of Justice was set up to give judgements, which must always be in favour of closer political union. This court had little to do with “Justice” and much to do with “Integration”. It should have, more accurately, been called the European Court of Integration.
This treaty, and all the others following, were drafted in accordance with the “Acquis Communitaire” system, “that which is acquired by the Community.” It means power, once handed to Brussels, is never returned, and cannot be re-negotiated.
The European Communities Act of 1972
In 1972 Edward Heath pushed through Parliament the European Communities Act. This Act was not an international treaty, but an Act of Parliament, deciding that it no longer was the supreme authority for lawmaking in this country. This Act was passed in conjunction with Britain applying for membership of the “Common Market” or European Economic Community (EEC). The public were never told about the consequences of this Act.
In the famous “Metric Martyr” High Court judgement 29 years later, in the spring of 2001, Judge Morgan ruled that because of this Act “We are now living under a new legal order. Parliament surrendered its sovereignty in 1972. The doctrine of the primacy of European Law holds good. European Union laws have over-riding force with priority over our law.” This judgement was confirmed on appeal.
Britain Joins the EEC on January 1st 1973
Unbeknown to the British electorate, Edward Heath, in order to gain membership of the EEC, had made a deal in 1972 with the EEC and gave away British sovereignty of our territorial fishing waters. Up to that point Fishing had not been included in any Treaties, but was later added in the Maastricht Treaty under Articles 38-47.
Our Referendum in 1975
Harold Wilson, after campaigning in the 1974 General Election on the basis of wanting to renegotiate our terms of EEC entry, gave us a referendum. The referendum was on whether or not we were happy with the “re-negotiated terms” to approve Britain’s 1973 entry into the EEC under the Treaty of Rome .
In fact there were no changes at all to the terms of entry, and the treaty itself was unchanged.
He strongly advised the country to vote “YES”, giving so-called “trade” reasons, and directly reassuring us that there would be no loss of sovereignty. This we did, on a low vote of only 47%. There has never been another referendum in the last 35 years. Now, nobody below the age of 53 has ever had the chance to vote in a referendum on how this country should be governed.
The Single European Treaty of 1986
This treaty was signed by Margaret Thatcher who later said that she had been tricked into signing it. But Article “A” says the purpose of it was “ever closer union”, which is in line with the earlier Treaty of Rome.
The treaty changed the Common Market, or EEC, to the European Community, with the word “Economic” left out. It also removed the national veto in certain areas by the principle of Qualified Majority Voting in the Council of Ministers. It also introduced European control over lawmaking, employment, regional development, environment and foreign policy.
The Merchant Shipping Act of 1988
This was not an international treaty but a normal Parliamentary procedure which went through the House of Commons, and the Lords, and received the Queen’s Royal Assent. This Act regulated, amongst other things, the allocation of our reduced fishing quotas, in British waters, to British-registered trawlers at the expense of the foreign fleet. The Act was declared illegal by the European Court of Justice and Britain was fined, and also had to pay compensation to Spanish trawler owners, at a total cost to this country of £100m. The Conservative Government meekly paid up, with taxpayers’ money, without a murmur, so as not to alert the public about what a disaster we faced.
The Maastricht Treaty of 1993
The official name is: Treaty on European Union Agreed by John Major, it changed the European Community to the European Union.
Article 8 made all citizens of the United Kingdom citizens of the European Union, including Her Majesty the Queen, and could be deemed an act of treason by any who signed it, including Douglas Hurd, the Foreign Secretary, and Francis Maude who both formally signed the document.
Indeed, a citizen’s charge of treason was taken out against them by Norris McWhirter, of Guinness Book of Records fame. This was successful in the magistrates’ court, but the case then had to go to a higher court.
At this point the Attorney General in the Conservative government exercised his power to take over any private citizen’s right to go to law, and having replaced Norris McWhirter, he failed to take it any further, thus ending the treason procedure against Douglas Hurd and Francis Maude.
The treaty created obligations of its citizens to the newly created European Union, or EU, but did not state what they are. That was left to the European Court of Justice to decide.
The ECJ was officially given full authority by the Treaty, to be the Supreme Court of Europe, under articles 169-172. The Maastricht Treaty introduced Regionalisation throughout Europe, whereby the whole of the EU is split up into Regions to be directly governed by Brussels, by-passing Westminster through the secretive Committee of the Regions.
Britain is now just 12 regions in Europe, and both British local, and parliamentary government, is being gradually replaced in power and influence. London, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are 4 of the 12 regions, with England broken up into 9 separate EU regions. You will have noticed how services such as health, ambulances, planning guidance and now police are being regionalised along these lines.
The Treaty officially confirmed the creation of the EU fishing waters, although, by arrangement with Brussels, Britain had already agreed that EC fishing boats, the vast majority of which are Spanish, could fish in British waters. From then onwards British waters, holding over 70% of Europe’s fish stocks, became EU waters, with Britain being allocated, under the new quota system, about 12 1/2% of the annual catch, devastating UK fishing.
The introduction of Regulations was provided by the Treaty
Regulations, issued by the European Commission, have an immediate effect in law in all countries, without being debated in any national parliament. An example is Regulation 3760/92 which decreed that, from 1st January 2003, EU fishing boats would be able to fish right up to our shores, thus abolishing our 12 mile limit.
Directives, on the other hand, are notionally debated before being incorporated into UK law, after being adjusted or “gold-plated” by the government. The break-up of the Post Office is because of EU Directives 97/67/EC & 2002/39/EC, which have undermined the Royal Mail, and EU state Aid rules, which have led directly to the closure of 2,500 post offices in this country. The Government, and opposition politicians, apart from an honourable few, hardly ever mention this in their arguments over the current problems facing the Royal Mail.
Regulations will gradually replace Directives as more power goes to Brussels.
The Treaty also introduced the notion of a Common Defence Policy, and a single currency. We all know about the currency, but have you noticed the BBC talking about the European Navy patrolling the seas off Somalia, when the ship doing so is clearly a Royal Navy frigate acting under orders from its HQ in Brussels? Are we prepared to fight for a European state?
In the early 1990s Britain entered the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) in preparation for joining the Euro single currency. However we entered at the wrong rate, and in attempting to maintain a fixed rate for the pound we suffered, in the following two years, high interest rates reaching 15%, unemployment rising from 1.5m to 3m, and 100,000 businesses going bankrupt. To avoid total monetary collapse and the loss of all our reserves to the speculators, Britain was forced to leave the ERM and float the pound. The pound has been floating happily ever since. However the European Commission intends that Britain should be in the European currency, because there cannot be full political union without monetary union.
The Treaty of Amsterdam of 1999. (“just an amending treaty,” Tony Blair)
Signed by Tony Blair in Rome, it placed EU control over further areas of British law, and established Europol, the EU state security service, which, is above the law, and cannot be sued, whatever damage they do in the exercise of their activities. Vladimir Bukovsky, the Soviet dissident, makes the point that even the KGB did not enjoy this immunity. Europol comes into being, with full authority as an EU agency, on January 1st 2010.
Treaty of Nice in 2001
Signed again by Tony Blair, giving up another 39 vetoes on areas of British life. It introduced Corpus Juris which was an interpretation of Continental law, to replace British law such as Habeas Corpus, whereby a person cannot be held in custody for more than 96 hours without being charged. Under Corpus Juris a suspect can be held in custody for up to six months without charge, and then a further three months in custody without trial.
The concept of the accused being assumed to be innocent, unless proved guilty in a Court, will go. Already in EU civil law, the responsibility has fallen on the accused to prove his innocence. The entitlement of a person charged with a criminal offence to be tried by a jury, will also go.
Under the EU Arrest Warrant, any UK citizen can be extradited to another EU country on suspicion of committing an act which is not an offence in this country. He can be put in prison, while waiting to be charged, or to be put on trial by a magistrate or judge. 308 UK citizens were extradited in this way in 2008, according to the charity Fair Trials International.
Article 191 grants the EU power to withdraw, or prevent, funding, private, state or at EU level, for political parties deemed “unsuitable”. This means that the EU can suspend, or ban, a political party if it so decides.
This could first apply to EU-critical parties and is associated with the laws of a police state.
The European Constitution Treaty of 2004
This was signed by Blair and was intended to be the second Treaty of Rome and the last treaty necessary to give Brussels full control of Europe with the creation of “The United States of Europe”.
The new state would have its own legal entity as a country, with its own Foreign Policy and its own embassies throughout the world. The member states would cease to exist as such and would end up as mere regions within the new state.
In other words, the EU’s foreign office will not be at the service of the nation states, but will supplant them. This is now being enacted through the EU’s Brok Report and with its new Foreign Minister, Baroness Ashton.
The European Commission would take full executive powers for itself, would choose its own members who could not be removed. Furthermore the Commission, if it so decided, would be able to change or “amend” any existing arrangements in the same way as Hitler did with his Enabling Act in 1933. In other words, the Commission was effectively given the powers of a legally-appointed Dictatorship.
The European Council, representing the heads of all the member states, and acting as a form of Trustee for the EU, would become merely a Senate, or talking shop, with no remaining powers.
Tony Blair was eventually persuaded to agree to have a Referendum on the new Constitution to ratify his signature. This forced France and Holland to do the same, and as they were thought likely to vote yes, this would persuade Britain to do likewise. To the horror of the politicians, both France and Holland voted decisively against the Treaty and this killed off the project for the time being. It also let off Mr Blair from having a referendum in Britain.
Meanwhile in the General Election of 2005, two months before the French Referendum, all three main parties in the UK promised in their manifestos, that if voted into power, they would give the voters a referendum on a Constitutional Treaty.
The European Reform Treaty of 2007 (The Lisbon Treaty, now a Constitution)
After the demise of the Constitutional Treaty of 2004 the European politicians gradually recovered from the shock of the French and Dutch reversals and set up the Lisbon Treaty which, they said, was not a Constitutional treaty at all. It was instead, merely a “tidying up exercise”, to help the European Commission be more “efficient” in governing the enlarged Europe of 27 nations. The Eastern Lib Dem MEP and avowed federalist, Andrew Duff, co-wrote this Treaty/Constitution.
In order to be more “efficient” in governing it does help to be a dictatorship. A dictatorship does not have to use up time, and energy, in consulting, or listening to, the people, or ever risking a general election.
The word “Reform” was put into the Treaty to enable the previous treaties to be reformed, or adjusted, and more importantly, to make it look less like its predecessor of 2004.
The actual wording of the European Reform Treaty is very difficult to understand because it keeps referring to previous treaties, and the reader has no way of really grasping what it means without the help of an experienced, constitutional lawyer. Few ordinary Members of Parliament could master what it really meant.
However the experts who did understand what it was about, included Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the ex-French President and author of the “dead” Constitution of 2004, who said it was virtually the same. Indeed out of 250 articles only 10 were different from its predecessor.
The key self-amending clause was retained in the Treaty under Article 48
This is extremely dangerous as it allows EU Ministers to amend the treaty behind closed doors with no further need for parliamentary approval or referenda.
The main differences were the lack of the word “Constitution” in the name, which was replaced by the word “Reform,” the removal of the 12 star national flag, and the EU “Ode to Joy” anthem from the text. The two latter items have already been added back to all EU procedures currently taking place.
The Irish were required by their own Constitution to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and this took place in 2008. Again, much to the consternation of the politicians, the Irish voted “NO” in their referendum.
However, in the summer of 2009, Brussels again presented to Ireland the same referendum on the unchanged Treaty with the “invitation” to vote again. The Irish voted “YES” this time round, and once Poland and the Czech Republic reluctantly followed Ireland, without a referendum, the Treaty was finally ratified by the politicians (but not by the peoples) of all EU countries and became law on December 1st 2009.
Meanwhile Britain was denied the right to vote on the Lisbon Treaty, affecting the entire future of this country, by Gordon Brown, the leader of our Labour Government, who denied that the Treaty was the same as the Constitution Treaty. He was aided by the leader of the Liberal Democrats, and both of them instructed their parties to vote directly against what each party had promised in their 2005 Manifestos, namely, to have a Referendum on any Constitutional changes affecting Britain.
Between them they both broke their election promises and forced our Westminster Parliament to vote its parliamentary sovereignty into oblivion, or into the hands of un-elected bureaucrats to govern us without us being able to remove them.
The Lisbon Treaty does include virtually all the terms of its predecessor, the 2004 Constitutional Treaty, which have been described earlier, and will be the last treaty required. There will not be any need for further treaties because the European Commission has now acquired all the powers it needs. The Commission has become a legally-created Dictatorship although the way it was done leaves very serious doubts about the whole concept of a truly united Europe.
How did the politicians get away with it?
Because it was done so slowly we did not notice. It was so boring and complicated that we ignored it. The politicians lied to us all along, yet we believed them.
This was just as Jean Monnet had planned in the 1950s.
The Conservative Party have gone back on the now infamous “cast iron guarantee” and have told us that they will now not hold any referendum. They will merely try to stop further powers going to the EU, in the foreseeable future, and seek to renegotiate aspects of treaties. However this is impossible as there is no provision for it under EU laws. We must see what happens if they get into power in our Westminster Parliament. They will find themselves up against European law, which they must obey if they wish to remain in the European Union.
Two perfect examples of this will be:
First, when we are required by the Commission to give up the Pound and enter the Euro money system. This is a requirement of both the 2004 Constitution and, more importantly, the Lisbon Treaty.
One of its clauses states that “the currency of the Union shall be the Euro”, and you cannot be more plain than that. There is going to be a political explosion when it happens. The Conservatives can do nothing about it except make a decision to join the Euro against all their promises to the electorate, or take the opportunity to make a final break and leave the EU, which any country can still do under the terms of Lisbon.
The second example could arise if the Commission “requires” Britain to change over to driving on the right, which the Commission can do as it has dictatorial powers over us, and from its point of view is the logical thing to do. After all, you can hardly have part of a single country driving on the left, with the rest of it driving on the right.
You may think that this is an exaggeration and the whole thing is becoming farcical. But it is no more farcical than a previously sovereign country, such as ours, committing suicide, which Britain seems to have done.
If you wish to embarrass your MP, ask whether his, or her, loyalty is to the Queen or to the new President of Europe. After all, the Queen is now a citizen of the EU.
Did you know that the Commission has appointed 7 ex-communists, including Mr Barroso, the current Chairman? Mrs Merkel, from East Germany, is another.
Did you know that the terms of the Lisbon Treaty introduced the Death Penalty in certain circumstances?
The terms are tucked away in an obscure place (a footnote attached to a footnote) and have not yet been noticed by the Labour or Liberal Parties who voted for it.
What is a wasted vote?
A wasted vote is a vote for a party with whose policies you do not agree. Anyone who does not wish to be part of the EU and votes for any of the three main parties is wasting their vote. For those who do want to be governed by the EU it does not matter which party they vote for as each of those three parties will keep us in the EU and under total EU control.
If a Europhile tells you that three million jobs in Britain depend on the EU just remind them that four million jobs in Europe depend on exports to Britain. 80% of Britain’s trade is generated internally, with 20% being exports and imports. Of this 20%, only about 9% is with countries in the EU and 11% is with the rest of the world. As Britain has a large trade deficit with the EU, and is its single largest trading partner, it is hardly likely that trade would suffer if we left the EU. Switzerland and Norway are in Europe but not in the EU, and are the two richest European countries per head. The benefits of trade with the EU can be retained by a free trade agreement- the EU has such agreements with many countries and the Swiss are spared import taxes in theirs. Their own government found that being outside the EU cost 600m Swiss francs but saved 3.4 billion francs each year. The EU needs Britain for trade more than we need the EU trade.
Vladimir Bukovsky, the Soviet dissident who spent 12 years in a gulag said, “Remember, I have lived your future and it does not work.”
We have been warned. We have just begun to live in a totalitarian regime, although many people do not yet realise this.
Can We Leave The European Union? Yes We Can !
Under the British Constitution no Parliament can bind its successors, so a new Parliament can quickly overturn all the EU treaties signed to date and repeal the European Communities Act 1972, which gave Parliamentary approval for joining the then EEC.
The Lisbon Treaty, for the first time, defines a mechanism for withdrawal in Article 50.2
However the terms would be set by the EU to make things as difficult as possible for the applicant state.
The likely arrangements for leaving would be:
1. The UK Parliament would rescind all previous EU treaties under the basic rule of our Constitution that “No Parliament Can Bind Its Successors.”
2. Parliament would therefore repeal the European Communities Act 1972, and all subsequent EU legislation, thereby returning to the people the power to appoint our government.
3. Having repealed the European Communities Act of 1972, the British Government, being sovereign, would inform the European Commission that Britain is leaving the EU immediately and would, henceforth, no longer be subject to any EU Directives, or Regulations.
This action would no doubt cause considerable fury, and dire threats, from the European Commission but it could do nothing about it as Britain would no longer be a member.
Any action such as imposing trade tariffs would be illegal under World Trade Organisation ( WTO ) guidelines.
4. Having officially left the European Union, Parliament could at last govern this country as it was elected to do. Probably its first task would be to negotiate a trade deal with the EU from a position of strength and independence.
5. Parliament’s next task would be to unravel all the unnecessary directives, and regulations, from the 120,000 laws imposed on us by the European Commission.
This would release an enormous amount of energy, and enterprise, that is stifled by current legislation. It would get Britain going again, and allow considerable cuts in red tape on businesses and lower taxes for citizens and businesses alike.
We would be a democratic, de-regulated, competitive offshore haven, with lower taxes, less bureaucracy and very much richer too. It is never too late to do the right thing.