Aug 28 2007
Mr Milliband lies for Europe
Mr Milliband on the Today programme was allowed to get away with some whoppers at the end of his interview on Iraq. At least the BBC realised they had to try to ask him something about the absence of a referendum on the Constitution, but they allowed him to make three entirely false points at the end. All of them should have been exposed to proper cross examination. I repeat the Milliband falsehoods (with response) beneath:
1. This deal on the “Constitutional treaty” is “good for Britain”.
What is good about surrendering the veto over so many areas? Why do we want the EU taking much more power over foreign policy, criminal justice, and energy? Haven’t we learnt from the mess they have made of our farms and fishing grounds where they have most of the powers to manage?
2. “This Treaty is very different from the Constitution”.
It is virtually identical to the Constitution, just taking the word “Constitution” out but leaving the main powers and changes in.
3. It “protects our red lines”.
The so-called red lines have been well and truly breached. If this goes ahead the governemnt will discover that Protocols, declarations, and Opt-ins do not protect UK independence in crucial areas like tax, criminal justice and foreign affairs. The only way to protect our independence is to leave in place the veto. Why take the risk of substituting something weaker?
RSS Feed
John Redwood has been the Member of Parliament for Wokingham since 1987. First attending Kent College, Canterbury, he graduated from Magdalen College...
How the original EEC which was meant as a block to promote free-trade has become the bureaucratic political state that it is today is facinating, and a lesson in how statism can develop. The EEC/EC/EU has developed by degrees, has grown into a European superstate by stealth. The EU constitutional treaty is yet another rung on the ladder. A character like Mr Milliband has no concept of where we have come from and where we are going. He is just another party functionary who cloaks himself in catchphrases, without really understanding what these handed-down phrases mean.
As usual, these claims went unchallenged on Today - where is Paxman when we need him?
The ‘rebellion’ by 120 MPs is disclosed in today’s Telegraph, but the question is will Labour MPs have the guts to rebel against Brown when most didn’t dare back anyone against him in the Leadership
[...] or bust? 27 08 2007 10.57am update: On his blog John Redwood exposes Miliband’s porkies on Today: and brilliantly debunks Miliband’s claims that the Constitution is ‘good for [...]
I’ve just noticed an official BBC guide to the differences between the constitution and the treaty that was posted on August 3rd: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6928737.stm
I would be very interested to know what Mr Redwood makes of our public broadcaster’s attempt at an impartial, not-at-all-Europhiliac explanation of this controversial issue.
“…is the result the same or different? The DNA of mice and humans is 90% the same, points out British Labour MEP Richard Corbett - but the remaining 10% is rather important.”
(If this were Private Eye, I could imagine the punchline “Richard Corbett is 15 years old”)
Reply: it is a more balanced appraisal than we get from interviewers on the anchor current affairs programmes, but it misses the point about the trick to claim it is no longer the “Constitution”
Of course it is now more complex and written in a different way, because instead of ditching all existing Treaties and introducing the complete rewrite in the form of the Constitution, they are taking all the new powers from the draft Constitution and inserting them by way of amendments to the existing Treaties. The mice and men DNA analogy is flawed. The differences between the draft Constitution and the Amendment Treaty are related to means, not to the ends, the power grab by the EU.
Nor should you believe it when they say they are dropping the anthem, the flag and the trappings of a state. I bet we still hear the Ode to Joy and see the 12 Stars flapping on flagpoles. Renaming the Foreign Minister the High Respresentative also makes little difference to the thrust of the Constitution. Once he or she is in place there will be endless pressure on delinquent states to tow the line and accept whatever such an official wants the Union to do or say. If our Foreign Secretary and the Union High Rep are waiting to see an important PM or Foreign Minister abroad, who will be taken more seriously once we are under pressure to sign up to a common policy?
Milli says the treaty is good for Britain. I hope he believes that. I’d hate to think the government wants to ram through a treaty that was going to be bad for kingdom. However, that doesn’t negate the point these Labour backbenchers are making that it should be ratified by the people.
Ever since Miliband announced he was planning to make me swipe a card debiting my ‘personal tradeable carbon credits’ when I fill up the car and charge me to fish in the sea I have stopped listening to a word this idiot says.