Alphen,
Netherlands. 24 February. Let me state for the record; Britain will not leave
the EU. Prime Minister David Cameron is
utterly in the pocket of big business, which would happily scrap democracy and
Britain for no-tariff pan-European trade.
Labour leader Ed Milliband (pronounced me-ee-bon) is in fact a Belgian
Socialist, and like all Belgian Socialists he would happily scrap Britain to
create a European super-state, he simply dare not say so. Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg
(pronounced clog) is actually a Dutch liberal (and a Euro-federalist to boot). The Americans think Britain’s only purpose is
to do their bidding in the EU - the Special Relationship. The Germans believe that one day the British
will awake to find the Germans were right, all along, about everything, and need
to be protected from themselves. The French
desperately want the British in the EU to balance Germany, but only if Britain accepts
the French view of ‘Europe’. Therefore,
those that think a) there will be a Brexit referendum; and b) (if it happens)
it will be anything but rigged, are a) totally naïve; and b) fail to understand
the nature of power in the EU and the elite relationships that hold the
Onion together, and how little democracy actually matters.
Yesterday,
the Norwegian Europe Minister (who he?), a certain Mr Vidar Helgesen, told the
British people not to leave the EU. He
made his intervention into British domestic politics at the
euphemistically-named think-tank “British Influence”. Led by Lord ‘I-actually-mean-the-opposite-of-everything-I-say-in-public’
(and former European Commissioner) Mandelson, ‘British Influence’ routinely
leaves out the key word in its title which should read “Scrap British
Influence”. By the way, Mr Helgesen said
he did not want to enter the Brexit debate.
Sorry, Mr Helgesen, but by speaking at “Scrap British Influence” you not
only entered the Brexit debate, you dove in at the deep-end wearing lead-lined
Norwegian divers boots.
Mr Helgesen
seemed to be warning the Brits not to suffer the same ‘marginalisation’ Norway
has suffered by being outside the EU. Mr
Helgesen clearly does not understand power and why the relationship between the
EU and a non-EU UK would be different from the relationship between the EU and
non-EU Norway. Let me enlighten him. Norway,
population 5m, has the world’s 50th largest economy. Britain, population 65m, according to CEBR (a
think-tank) overtook France in December to once again become the world’s 5th
largest economy. Now, I spend quite a
lot of time in oil-rich Norway and it never strikes me as a country that is
suffering too much from being outside the EU.
Far from it!
Mandelson’s
tactic is to line-up a range of foreign pro-EU speakers to present ‘facts’ that
demonstrate to the British people that a Brexit would mean the end of British
influence, Britain itself, the National Health Service, and even Sheffield
United Football Club, but not the House of Lords which goes on forever albeit
for no apparent reason. He also rather
conveniently fails to point out that the incompetent and
strategically-illiterate British elite have already done a pretty good job at
ending British influence even without the ‘help’ of the EU. Critically, Mandelson offers nothing positive
about the EU or Britain’s place in it.
He simply peddles fear.
Mandelson
is not alone in peddling such scare tactics. Nick Clog routinely suggests that Britain
would lose 3m jobs and 50% of its exports if it left the EU. He achieves these staggering figures by
counting up every single UK job that is somehow engaged in exporting to the rest
of the EU, and then suggests a Brexit would destroy all of them. As for 50% of British trade evaporating
courtesy of a Brexit, only 44% of Britain’s trade actually goes through the
rest of the EU, and of that figure 8% is actually trade re-exported via
Rotterdam to the rest of the world. Moreover, Britain suffers from a massive
trade deficit with the rest of the EU.
In other words, the real trade figure is 36%, and the rest of the EU
does far better out of Britain, than Britain does out of the EU.
Sadly, we
can all expect more of this nonsense, and not just from the “Scrap British
Influence” brigade. The
Brit-Kommentariat routinely blame Brussels for Britain’s many ills when it has
nothing to do with the EU. There is no question that should the British get a
referendum, and then actually vote to leave, some level of punitive action
would be taken against the British by the EU “pour encourager les autres”. So Nige, no broad sunlit uplands for
you mate!
However,
the saddest part of the appalling Brexit debate is the now ritualistic
Brit-bashing that occurs daily across the Euro-Kommentariat, and the role
played therein by British apologists. European Geostrategy (a good thing) this
week published a piece by Nick Witney in which he said, “The British are
trapped in a crisis of post-imperial national identity and show no signs of emerging
soon”. What complete and utter
tosh. Most Brits do not even know about
the Empire (poor education and no knowledge of history before Princess Diana),
and even fewer can remember it (it was a long time ago, Nick). There is a lot
Nick writes with which I agree, but not this. Such statements are symptomatic
of the lazy, intellectual rubbish (sorry, Nick) that the Euro-Kommentariat
routinely spawns about Britain.
For most
Brits the EU on offer is not the EU they want – plain and simple. It is not because we are supposedly (and
aimlessly) wandering around dreaming great dreams of Kipling, Rorke’s Drift and
the Raj. For the record, I do not like
the EU for which I once worked because it does not listen to me, it does not
work, is made for others by others, makes ‘Europe’ weaker than the sum of its
parts, and I am expected to pay a lot for it. Get it?
However, my
principled objection to the EU, which I share with many Brits born of the
tradition of John Locke, concerns the relationship between power and the individual
in Europe. Like many Brits I am a pro-European, EU-skeptic. Yes, I believe in European co-operation but what
worries me about the EU is that Brussels is fast becoming the complete opposite
of Abraham Lincoln’s aphorism about democracy.
It is government above the people, imposed on the people, and most
clearly not for the people and looks ever more like a corruption of another Lincoln
aphorism; you can fool some of the people some of the time, but if you really
make democracy irrelevant and power far enough distant, you can fool all of the
people all of the time…or at least ignore them. The European Parliament? Forget
it. The ‘EP’ is a rubber-stamping chamber designed to provide fig-leaf
legitimacy for over-bearing power which has little to no legitimacy with
citizens. Look how Jean-Claude Juncker
stole last year’s election results to claim a legitimacy that he simply does not possess.
In other
words, in the year in which the anniversaries of both Magna Carta and the
founding of the Mother of Parliaments are being celebrated, the EU makes me
wonder why my British forebears fought for so long for freedom if my leaders
are simply going to give said freedom away to a distant bureaucracy in which my
country is blatantly under-represented, and/or a Berlin (or a complex mix of
the two) that still too often confuses the words ‘Germany’ and ‘Europe’. Yes, I admit it is better than giving away freedom
to Moscow. However, I am sure Comrade Vlad could arrange that as well if the EU
makes Europe any weaker than it already is.
This is not the EU in which I once believed.
Furthermore,
far from preparing Europeans for a globalised world, the EU is fast becoming
one gigantic protectionist racket which champions ‘Europeanisation’ as the denial
of globalisation. Take the proposed Energy Union which is being rolled
out by the European Commission today. On
the face of it such a Union makes sense.
The Commission (as ever) claims it would boost consumer choice
transnationally, generate pan-European energy infrastructure investment, and
integrate energy supply systems on an EU-wide basis. In fact, the Energy Union
is yet another opportunistic power-grab by the federalist Commission seizing on
international friction to further extend its unaccountable power at the expense
of national energy regulators, and by extension the legitimate European
nation-state.
For Britain, Europe’s most open and international economy (see the OECD report on Britain of yesterday), an Energy Union would mean yet more regulation, more protectionism and yet another raft of national public policy that Parliament is no longer permitted to oversee because it is ‘European Regulation’. Do such concerns make me opposed to intense European co-operation? No, of course not! Do I have the right to express such concerns as a citizen? It is my duty.
For Britain, Europe’s most open and international economy (see the OECD report on Britain of yesterday), an Energy Union would mean yet more regulation, more protectionism and yet another raft of national public policy that Parliament is no longer permitted to oversee because it is ‘European Regulation’. Do such concerns make me opposed to intense European co-operation? No, of course not! Do I have the right to express such concerns as a citizen? It is my duty.
The new
paperback edition of my book Little Britain (www.amazon.co.uk) poses the real question at the heart of the Brexit debate; how
best to use the not inconsiderable power Britain still possesses in the
twenty-first century world and, indeed, Europe. Simply allowing British power to vanish into
the mutual impoverishment pact the contemporary EU has become is in no-one’s
interest, least of all the British. As
for the idea that the EU magnifies Britain’s place on the world stage I think The Economist for once got it right when
it said recently, “European power diminished by two world wars, has disappeared
down the rabbit-hole of European integration”.
Britain
SHOULD stay in the EU but only if there is a new political settlement that once
and for all ends the drift towards EU federalism, and properly establishes a
proper balance of powers and competences between the EU and its
member-states. For most thinking Brits
that means an EU that is more super-alliance than super-state. Unfortunately, strategically-challenged Dave
has told his EU chums that if they do not like that idea, and even if he does
in fact honour his pledge to hold a referendum, he will campaign to stay in an
unreformed EU. Brilliant Dave! The country is clearly safe in your hands. Now, why not tell Vlad the Improper that if
he goes on sending his nasty bombers over Britain you will scrap the British
armed forces? Oh, you already have.
British influence?
In fact, my
big fear is that the Brexit referendum does indeed takes place, Britons
actually vote to stay in the EU, but do so through fear rather than conviction and thus go on pretending the EU is a ‘foreign’ imposition. Should a ‘yes’ vote ever happen the Brits
would have to finally and fully engage in the European Project (i.e. the
creation of a European super-state) and rule from Brussels. Why? There
is an old Italian joke that goes something like this. Every day an old Roman goes to pray at the
statue of one of the Apostles. Day after
day he cites the same prayer, “Please, Lord, let me win the lottery”. After several years of this the statue
eventually becomes so irritated he comes to life and in exasperation says to
the old man, “Ok, Luigi, but please, for once, buy a lottery ticket!”
The issues thinking
British EU-scepticism raises go to the very heart of freedom, justice and
representation in twenty-first century Europe and for the sake of Europeans
cannot and must not be dismissed as the post-imperial bleatings of a few Little Englanders. As for Mr Helgesen,
just give your oil money to Syriza if its makes you feel better...and more 'European'.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.