Latest from UKIP Daily

UK Democracy abolished and the Government of Europe!

UK sovereignty, democracy and independence has been abolished and replaced by a token “influence” in an Assembly of 736 MEP’s, worth 9% at best in the European Parliament. The Government of EUParliament, the executive, is the Commission who are unelected and unaccountable.

This is what is required to block EU legislation from the unelected Commission:-

There are 736 MEPs in total. The quorum to make a vote valid is one third of the total, i.e. 245 MEPs. Therefore in an easiest case scenario you would need to convince 123 of them or more that a proposal was fundamentally flawed. However, in reality, more than a third of MEPs usually turn up to the plenary session, so if you wished to err on the side of caution you would probably need to presume that the plenary was in full session and all the MEPs were present. If that were the case, you would need to convince 369 MEPs or more that a proposal should be rejected.” quote source.

It would require pan-European co-operation to form groups in a minimum of 4 Member States.

Most Mep’s are self-serving, unaccountable and anonymous, who readily pass legislation, as their countries are likely net beneficiaries and certainly well remunerated to, keep pushing that “YES” button.

“The (EU)Commission is the executive, it is the government of Europe and it has the sole right to propose legislation. It does so in consultation with 3000 secret committees, staffed mainly by big business and big capital, and all the legislation , is proposed in secret…and once something becomes European law, it is the European Commission themselves that have the sole right to propose, repeal and change that legislation. THE COMMUNITY METHOD (championed by the EU) …”mean by which the European Commission makes law and holds law is actually the very enemy of the concept of democracy itself, because it means that any Member State, there is nothing the electorate can do to change a single piece of European Law” Nigel Farage UKIP leader.

So when politicians talk about “fax democracy*” and “influence” when discussing Norway for example, fax democracy* applies to 100% of the legislation passed onto the UK as well. With EEA membership, Norway chooses the bits to participate in the Internal Market. They adopt almost all EU legislation related to the Single Market, except laws on agriculture and fisheries, but have no MEP’s or Commissioners, so the claim is they have no influence.. Their GREATER “influence” lies in the early stages of formulating EU regulations in the various (70+) international bodies we are excluded from, because of EU membership. The Single Market rules include “free movement of peoples, workers and Capital”. So Not ideal for them either, but a slight improvement, they have their own fishing grounds and agriculture.

Source Dr. Richard North. He advocates a “pro tem” EEA membership as a temporary staging area, because the conditions are similar, without political membership, while bi-lateral trade treaties are agreed at a later date probably 5 years after Brexit.)

In my opinion and many others, we would be better off out, no treaty at all. Completely sovereign and independent from decisions on domestic policy. Trading with Europe, the Commonwealth, Anglosphere, BRICS etc. by companies & corporations adopting whatever regulation are required to trade with them, just as they do anyway else around the world, in the global arena, paying the small amount in tariffs, if there are any, usually set by the World Trade Organisation(WTO). The EU needs us more than we need them. We are their largest export market. And the UK is the 6th largest trading economy, in the world. Trade will continue unabated, despite the scare stories. Most people who have up sticks and moved to neighbouring EU Member States and working, retired etc.,  this includes companies and corporations property rights, etc. will still be protected under the Vienna Convention on treaties . All their rights, liberties and funds will be protected under international law.

Source Article 70b Vienna Convention on Treaties 1969.

“trade with Europe, be friends with Europe, not run by Europe”

yours sincerely

Simon Blanchard

 

*  the word democracy comes from the Greek words DEMOS and CRACY

Demos =Common people( of the country)and Cracy = rule or power

The EU is a foreign bureaucracy, there is no demos in the EU.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
About Simon Blanchard (22 Articles)
SImon is Secretary of the Dartford branch in Kent

9 Comments on UK Democracy abolished and the Government of Europe!

  1. ” The Single Market rules include “free movement of peoples, workers and Capital”. ”

    So UKIP’s stance is to leave the EU including the Single Market? So what was the EEC then? Was that not a market? I.e. what is the difference between the two? Hasn’t UKIP got a standard statement about this and their policy on leaving and what position they wish to take after exiting, because I’m a little confused to how unworkable the Single Market is and where we need to place ourselves with regards to the EU.

    • The Emperors New Clothes // December 3, 2014 at 7:07 am //

      If you want to control the borders ie impose an Australian style points system on who you allow in to settle, work etc you can not be in the Single Market.
      The rules of the “Single Market” are the 4 pillars of “free movement of people, goods, services and capital” which is open borders.
      The “Single Market” is one of those slippery weasel phrases the EU uses to make it sound warm and freindly as they take control of your country’s borders. It’s used to deliberately confuse everyone. The implied belief is if we were not in the “Single Market” we wouldn’t be able to sell anything to them, but this is not the case. The rest of the planet trades with the EU, but they are not part of the Single Market. Is China in the Single Market?. No. Its either open borders or controlled borders. You can’t have both.

      We’ve been told the lie for decades by the established parties that they had “control” on the borders and they used to enforce the lie with so called targets and “limits” and the border agency checks on passports and so called immigration checks were part of the charade being played on the public. They were simply guesstimates, and any EEC/EU person is waved through unimpeded after showing his/her passport, just as UK people do. There is no difference , but just of late the government and even Labour now have abandoned this stance and stated there is no control at all on EEC/ EU migration. There was never any controls in the first place. New members at first had some restrictions, but these are always lifted, eventually when they become full members.

      The EEC had open borders too, but when most of the countries that were in it were of fairly equal standard of living, it made little difference, with much smaller amounts of people migrating. There was not the mass movement of people from poorer regions, when it was the EEC.

      The UK would still be able to trade with all the European countries, but not be in the Single Market.

      • Thank you for that Emperor that has cleared up the fuddled messages I have been receiving over the years. For example, as you say, “The rules of the “Single Market” are the 4 pillars of “free movement of people, goods, services and capital” which is open borders.” I thought that was just the Treaty of Rome and the SM was just that, a market, thereby implying that the T-of-Rome stuff was a separate matter or conditions.

        The other thing you have cleared up and highlighted is that of the EEC as I wasn’t sure how desirable that was or would be as an alternative. Fully out, then, is the chant!!!

    • The Emperors New Clothes // December 6, 2014 at 12:22 am //

      This is official UKIP policy on trade with the EU
      We would negotiate a bespoke trade agreement with the EU to enable our business to trading to mutual advantage.
      UKIP would not seek to remain in the European Free Trade Area (EFTA) or European Economic Area (EEA) while those treaties maintain the principle of free movement of labour, which prevents the UK from managing our borders.. We would reoccuppy our seat at the World Trade Centre, ensuring that we continue to enjoy most favoured nation status, in trade with the EU, as is required under WTO rules.

      • Many people talk about whether we would be like Norway or Switzerland but as you say UKIP wouldn’t seek the UK to be in the EFTA or EEA, which I think those two are, so UKIP’s position would be nothing like them, yes?

  2. We have basically voted for ourselves to be a minority. Thanks to our politicians we have become third rate citizens.

  3. The Emperors New Clothes // December 2, 2014 at 4:21 pm //

    I can see why Dr Richard North would want to opt for the EEA solution as a temporary fix, while a more permanent settlement is made. The EEA/EFTA model is already available and working and no one would notice much difference. The pro tem agreement would have to be set in stone, with an expiry date.
    The danger lies if any future pro EU government, in say 5 – 10 years time, decided it was in our best interests to sign us up again. As the government seems to think it can pretty much do what it likes against the wishes of the people, if it gets a majority in Parliament and the pro EU media would be licking its lips at the prosect of that scenario.
    That said there many who will not make the leap of faith and they’ll cling onto what they know already, in a referendum. The burning building theory. Where people won’t jump out of that 1st floor window, unless their life depended on it.
    There may need to be that staging area. that is acceptable to businesses and people to understand, it’s only political union that will be gone, not the end of the world as we know it.

  4. I’m delighted to start seeing more and more stronger and stronger arguments concerning EU Political Union membership vs Alternative “How To…” Brexit variable options. It’s been a long time coming but the wheels are slowly beginning to move.

    An excellent piece, Mr. Blanchard.

    One point of consideration. Concerning the Efta membership party to EEA Treaty (effectively Single Market access sustained on Brexit), this has certain “Properties” and is as it were a functional “Object”.

    * It’s an observable fully working example: This builds confidence
    * It reduces the scope of exit to transition: This builds trust
    * It appears to be a “middle way” argument: This builds support
    * It finesses the Pro-EU arguments: This builds belief

    The problem with any other kind of Brexit is that it would be criticized by Pro-EU detractors as “aspirational” more than “achievable” and open the flood-gates to “FUD” and “FUDGE”

    FUD = Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt from Big Business on the dismal science.
    FUDGE = The fallacy of the Middle way treaty amendment/sub-treaty Wilsonian Fudge trick pulled by Cameron on keeping us in the Political Union.

    What we want IS NOT “the optimal solution” we want “done” and that means putting the argument in a referendum down to membership to “Ever Closer Union” of a political union instead of what people were duped into voting for in 1975 “Trade with Europe” only.

    Everything else is secondary and hence anything that is secondary is “Inherited”… which is precisely what the EEA Object-ive is all about.

    Attempting to create an argument and working backwards to create the workings to the preferred solution is the wrong way to think about this problem. Not only that but the solution as per Dr. North’s ideas needs to be iterative: “Flexible” and “Continuous” as conditions and variables alter their input over time, too.

    • You and agree on this ‘ever closer union’ question and have posted such on various blogs.

      Cameron’s proposed Referendum on his ‘reform/renegotiation’ is merely ‘tinkering’ and does not address the ‘ever closer union’ question.

      Adopting the FLEXCIT route negates the FUD put up by business at a stroke.

Comments are closed.