Thanks, but no thanks, Mr Barroso
14 July 2007
A reflection by Jim Allister QC MEP on the recent EU Summit Agreement
Gordon Brown, desperate to avoid a referendum on the recast Constitution, pretends it amounts to mere tidying-up of the existing Treaties. Such is a fraud and deceit. It delivers all the substance of the rejected Constitution, in particular:
• a further tranche of 50 areas of power where the national veto will be surrendered;
• new competences of exclusive control by Brussels;
• a permanent EU President for Europe;
• an EU Foreign Minister, now called a High Representative, with obligations on all member states to adhere to the EU’s foreign policy;
• it bestows legal personality on the EU so that it can make treaties and binding international agreements in its own right – it is this which provides the basis for its own Foreign Minister and common foreign and defence policy;
• a seat for the EU at the United Nations;
• a self-amending provision whereby further constitutional change can be perfected by Heads of Government, without recourse to the people (already the European Parliament has demanded that once these constitutional changes are made, it will be demanding more removal of power to Brussels);
• new powers to control our criminal law.
Any doubt about what the new Treaty changes mean is easily dispelled by the proud boasts of those who pioneered it. Angela Merkel has boasted it retains “the substance” of the Constitution. The Commission and Parliament agree. Across Europe governments have quantified it variously as 90 -99 % the same as the Constitution. Only the British Government pretends otherwise. Why? because, they want to welch on their manifesto pledge of a referendum.
Now, EU Commission President, Barrosso, has really let the cat out of the bag. Speaking in his imperial headquarters in Brussels, he described the EU as an “Empire”. He said, “We should not have doubts about the EU’s future – it is what it has always been. It is the world’s first non-imperial Empire, with 27 countries that have agreed to pool their sovereignty.” Yet, Gordon Brown doesn’t think we should be asked our consent to a radical enhancement of the powers of this Empire of which we are to be a mere colony! He’s running scared of the promised referendum, because he knows the British people, still wanting national sovereignty, would reject this remodelled Constitution.
So the constitutional change proposed involves fundamental realignment of power away from national parliaments to Brussels and sets the foundation for ever-increasing centralisation.
The opposing views on this de facto Constitution are rooted in fundamentally divergent views on how we see Europe.
If, like me, the Europe in which you believe is one which offers free trade and economic advantage through the cooperation for mutual benefit of sovereign nation states, then you will oppose this these changes.
If, on the other hand, your vision for Europe is for total political and economic integration, where the nation state is an irritant and obstacle, then you will embrace this Constitution, for it is undoubtedly a vehicle headed in the direction you wish to go, which will steamroller out of existence all vestiges of national sovereignty and statehood.
I unapologetically believe in the sovereignty and supremacy of the nation state, because I believe in national electors being able to effective control the actions and policies of those who govern them. You can either be governed nationally or internationally through an unaccountable edifice like the European Union.
