This is the question I asked Dan Hannan MEP at a public meeting in Esher a few weeks back. Unfortunately he only gave me the standard answer about ‘not letting matters rest’, etc. which I already knew. But perhaps he could say nothing else at a public meeting.

As I see it there are only two logically consistent routes ahead for those unhappy with the general direction that the EU is taking; Reform or Withdrawal.

The problem I have with those Conservative reform proposals I have read about so far is that they do not address what I regard to be the fundamental problems with the EU system. For example I have heard of proposals to re-negotiate the return of powers in one or other areas where the EU has already assumed competence, for example social policy or fisheries. The distinction I would like to see is not a broad-brush distinction by policy area but rather as to whether an individual EU law or policy adds value in a way that a national law cannot. For example I can appreciate that EU environmental law to prevent cross-border pollution achieves something of value that no national law (by virtue of its limited jurisdiction) can achieve. But the EU should not be able to overrule national legislators when there is no cross-border issue at stake. Levels of pollution on British beaches for example should not be an issue for the EU to decide. The same is true (admittedly to a greater or lesser extent) in all policy areas.

My proposals for EU reform would be as follows:
- Restricting the rambling list of Objectives in current EU treaties to prevent the ECJ using the current ambiguity to rule in ways that further the federalist agenda. The EU should have two objectives only; (i) protecting the citizens of one member-state from harm to their life, property, environment, etc. originated beyond the jurisdiction of national law in another member-state and (ii) the provision of public works and services that no individual member-state (or private enterprise) can provide on its own.
- Given that national identity is far stronger than European identity in every EU state, representative governments demands that EU law should only be superior to national law in order to meet objective (i) above. In all other cases national parliaments should be able to opt-out of any individual EU decision they do not like (including those agreed to by previous administrations, e.g. the CAP). This would automatically force the EU to focus on an ongoing basis on only those areas where national parliaments and their electorates perceive it to add value. It would also preserve a protected space within which purely national legislation would be safe from the encroachment of EU power. And it would allow any arbitrary subset of countries wanting to pursue a common policy to do so as long as their parliaments do not object.
- The Council of Ministers should be stripped of all legislative power, so becoming a pure executive with a collective veto on the output of the EU Parliament. This would remove the current problem (recently highlighted by former German President Roman Herzog) of national executives (i.e. cabinet ministers) using the legislative powers of the EU Council of Ministers to bypass democratic checks (e.g. votes in their national parliaments) on their executive power at home.
- The Commission’s current monopoly on legislative initiative (which is morally indefensible for an unelected body to hold) should be removed and transferred to the EU Parliament. Since the democratic credentials of that Parliament are threadbare, a 2nd chamber of the EU Parliament should be added comprising of representatives of national 2nd chambers (e.g. House of Lords, German Bundesrat, French Senate etc.), which are more independent of over-mighty national executives than the lower houses. This 2nd EU chamber should have real power to propose, amend and block European legislation during its drafting. Mere scrutiny and ‘Yellow cards’ are nowhere near good enough.
- All EU laws should automatically time-out after say 20 years unless re-enacted in order that their (inherently weak) democratic legitimacy be refreshed.

I do not feel that the piecemeal return of powers that I have heard about from the Conservative party begins to address the fundamental problems that I see in the EU system. However proposals such those above for real reform are highly unlikely to be acceptable to the Federalists who hope that European identity will strengthen one day such that eventually Brussels rule will be able to claim a true democratic legitimacy. It therefore seems to me that real reform to make the EU acceptable is a pipedream and that the only practical solution is for the UK to leave the European Union. But here too I see no real activity from the Conservative party to prepare public opinion for what seems necessary.

Christ Almighty, who will put them out of my misery?!

I would like to think that their Lordships could be of some help, but it’s always wise to have a contingency in place.

Manifestos will be meaningless – what can MPs possible put forward to the elctorate? “We will put more bins in town centres” will be their election cry.

Its stange that MPs are happy to vote themselves out of a job – but then again the New Labour elite will probably put this on their CV when they apply for a “cushy” job in Brussels.

Neil Craig said “The coolness of the Question Time audience to those defending breaking the referendum promise was noticed even by Mr Dimbleby.”

Don’t forget that the Question Time audience does not represent the views of the population – they are “invited” to the program by the BBC .

My Government will bring forward a Bill to give effect to the Constitutional Treaty for the European Union, subject to a referendum.

http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page7488.asp

So what is the constitutional position?, surely prerogative rules ok

.

This will make them well qualified to work in high security areas: workers here are to be the Government’s second priority for ID cards.

In brief, the plans for introducing ID cards could well make the country less secure from terrorism. You couldn’t make it up…

And of course, we here in England once set a president. However, the next revolution, when it comes, may not be so glorious in its lack of bloodshed. (WORDS DELETED ED)
.

Keep up the good fight and lets hope that the House of Lords can see the treaty and the traitors for what they are and put the brakes on this whole thing.

Good Luck!

I have mixed views on the ID card issue – I’m afraid I see it as coming about inevitably with time. It will no doubt be very costly and badly handled, but still hard to stop.

Our real problem is at the same time the government has become self serving, deceitful and full of contempt for the wider population. Thanks to its fascination with marketing and spin combined with its shameless willingness to distort the truth, hide facts, issue false dossiers and break oaths to the people we stand on the edge of giving this monster unprecedented power over us all.

Government can no longer be trusted. It is no longer constrained by decency, religion, or shame. It is about to be handed unprecedented power over us all through information technology.

Hence government must be changed. A new Magna Carta is needed to constrain government and restore the nations sovereignty over itself from this self selecting bunch of student politicians.

The alternative is to fall into the night with no hope of awakening.

Reply:PING PONG TO TRY TO GET THE LORDS TO BACK DOWN FOLLOWED BY PARLIAMENT ACT. WE NEED A LOT MORE PEERS TO BE BRAVE TO GET THERE.

all usurped and foreign power and authority may forever be clearly extinguished, and never used or obeyed in this realm. no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate shall at any time after the last day of this session of Parliament, use, enjoy or exercise any manner of power,
jurisdiction, superiority, authority, pre eminence or privilege within this realm, but that henceforth the same shall be clearly abolished out of this realm, for ever.

If this is ratified and receives royal assent then the Queen is in breech of her coronation oath.
The Queen has solemnly promised to govern the
peoples of the United Kingdom according to the Statutes in Parliament agreed on and according to their laws and customs.

The protection of our constitution, the bill of rights and Magna Carta still stand.
Petition the Queen and invoke them.
Our democracy, and therby our sovereignty, were not handed to us, we fought and won them. On this issue the Queen has every right to intercede on behalf of her subjects.
It’s why we have a constitutional Monarchy.

reply:YOU CANNOT EXPECT A CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCH TO OVERTURN THE ELECTED GOVERNMENT OF THE DAY. ONLY THE ELECTORATE CAN DO THAT. THE QUEEN HAS TO ASSUME THE PEOPLE KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING WHEN THEY ELECTED A FEDERALIST COMMONS IN 2005.

Our only hope is that your party can come up with the necessary policies (and dare I say cojones?) to break the mould and revitalise democracy and restore faith in politicians. A hard task, but necessary.

It all comes back, as you say, to trust. Would I trust Apple? Definitely. It has never let me down, never broken a promise made, always delivered what we agreed and it is nice to work with.
The government, however, lie, cheat, tell half truths, agree to things behind my back and then tax me up to the hilt. They then treat me with contempt (advertisements on TV, micromanagement of my life, silly fads and vast wastage of “their” resources etc) and sign me up, without asking, to the EU which (in case they have not noticed) is run by France and Germany and always has been. We are at the Heart of Europe indeed!
Like a LOT of people in this Regionality I am FURIOUS.

ID cards will be forced onto all of us, and they will be compulsory to carry and this has nothing to do with our Government – this is EU policy.

And this is the problem the Conservatives face. Too many of us accept that Labour are only implementing policies that the Conservatives would have to put in place if they were in charge. I really don’t believe a word when I hear Conservative politicians say they are against ID cards. In government they will change thier tune because they will have no choice.