No sooner have we heard the usual trumpeting from one Tory dinosaur (see yesterday's article, below) than we hear echoes from another. John Major, while essentially a decent man, was quite inadequate as Prime Minister and led his party to their greatest defeat for decades. This failure does not stop him offering advice to his successor, who is struggling to restore Conservative fortunes by returning the party to the path it should never have left thirty years ago. When Clarke, Major and Heseltine talk of the Conservative party 'moving to the right' what they really mean is that it is becoming increasingly hostile to EU membership, a policy which is not the mark of the right, as Tony Benn, Arthur Scargill or Peter Shore can testify.

Even more ridiculous is Major's insistence that the Conservative must be a 'broad church' and should therefore embrace all views on Europe. While tolerance and understanding of the nuances of policy is always necessary in any sensible party, it is lunacy to suppose that those who want the UK to remain an independent, sovereign nation, governed by parliamentary democracy, can co-exist with those who wish to see her a series of provinces within a European federal state, ruled by bureaucrats. The same sort of reasoning would see Satanists accepted as part of the Church of England! The only way back for the Tories is to recognize that Clarke and his cronies have very little backing within the party, to eject them and to go forward as a party determined to conserve this nation as a nation. If they do not stand for even that then what use are they?

The media frequently claim that the Conservatives are a party divided on Europe but, if they are, it is between 95% who regard membership of the European Union as a disaster and a vociferous 5% who led the party astray in the sixties and whose baleful influence is yet to be expunged. Far from listening to proven failures such as Clarke and Major (remember membership of the ERM, which they so wanted, and which did so much damage to the British people) Hague should grasp the nettle, treat apologists for Brussels with the contempt they deserve and 'speak for England'. It is his only hope of defeating Blair, whose love of the European Union is not shared by the British people, or much of the real Labour party.

Even during this holiday season we see the tentacles of the European Union continue to strangle the life from our nation. As reported in the Times the use of imperial measurements becomes illegal in the UK as from the 1st January 2000, although ironically this legal dictatorship does not apply to the rest of the EU. Once again those who seek to extinguish every vestige of British identity are attempting to force the British people to adopt alien concepts in order to forward the cause of a federal European superstate. However the experience of the USA shows that nothing is irreversible. The number of American states reverting to the mile has now reached 18, Virginia has restored feet and inches for building regulations and Shell Oil have given up converting its filling stations when customers deserted in droves. In the UK one brave entrepreneur, Bruce Robertson of Trago Mills, is determined to disobey the Euro dictators and stick to imperial measures. He is prepared to go to prison rather than give in and one hopes that all patriotic Britons will support him, rather than the lackeys of the European Union whose loyalties lie outside these islands.

Another noteworthy development is the growing evidence that the great 'Architect of the European Union', Helmut Kohl, is in reality yet another of those corrupt European politicians, whose commitment to democracy is skin deep. As The Times says in its leader today "This scandal may hasten the growth of a salutary scepticism about the design and durability of the European house that Kohl built". Do we really want to throw away our nation and its ancient institutions for a place in the cesspool of modern Europe?

On the same day that a poll conducted by 'Business for Sterling' shows that support among the British people for joining the Euro has slumped to 17 percent, while those wanting to leave the EU altogether stands at 46 percent, that sanctimonious, condescending, patronising idiot Kenneth Clarke attacks William Hague for extremism in not being willing to join Clarke and his cronies in supporting the destruction of Britain's independence and nationhood. Clarke, a lawyer who admitted he did not even read the Maastricht Treaty before supporting it, and a man whose grasp of economics is on a par with his dress sense, can always be relied upon to champion the cause of the Brussels bureaucrats and those who loath their own country. His fat stomach, red face and 'hail fellow well met' style make the media treat him as some sort of John Bull but in reality that quintessential Frenchman, General de Gaulle, had a better grasp of the vital interests of the British than does Clarke and those who think like him. One should ask "Who is the extremist - the man who believes that the UK should continue as an independent nation-state, as she has been for nearly one thousand years, or one who wants her to become a series of provinces within a federal superstate, ruled from the Continent?"

Clarke claims that the Euro has been a success. If its dismal performance since its launch is a success can one imagine what would have been said if its value had appreciated by 14% during the past year, rather than falling by the same amount? Those like Clarke who made all kinds of extravagant claims about its potential a year ago have been shown to be fools as the realities of the markets point to its true value.

Clarke also claims that everyone believes that Britain's future lies within the European Union. That this is not so is obvious from the 46% who wish to withdraw. He may want to be involved with a narrow, and given the attitudes of so many on the Continent, potentially highly racist state, but more liberal and progressive people wish to make common cause with our relatives and friends around the world, in the USA, India, Australia and all those nations of the Commonwealth to whom we owe debts of gratitude and friendship.

Against all the evidence the media persist in treating Clarke and his cronies, such as Heseltine, as significant figures when they are in fact embittered has-beens, parroting the outdated rubbish espoused by Heath in the sixties. It is time they were recognized for what they are, not the spokesmen for a large part of the Conservative party, but no more than a few Europhiles whose ridiculous beliefs are being increasingly exposed by the awful realities of the corporate state being built across the Channel.

In his resignation statement Shaun Woodward attempts to perpetuate the myth that to be opposed to UK involvement in a federal Europe is the mark of the right wing. He may perhaps be surprised to find that the stoutest defenders of Britain's independence are to be found in the party he has now joined, from Tony Benn, Austin Mitchell and Denzil Davies in the Commons to the Lords Shore and Stoddart in the Lords. He might also find it hard to convince those who support the Socialist Labour Party and Trade Unions against a Single Currency, all of whom detest the European project, that they are in reality right wingers.

It is obvious that those who, like Woodward, support European federalism, belong to that large group of machine politicians, opportunists and careerists who see the chance for their own advancement on a larger stage, and do not scruple to place their own interests ahead of those of the British people. Those in politics who still adhere to principle may often be on opposite sides of the political divide but it is notable that they share a common view of the undemocratic agenda advanced by the EU and its apologists.

In an interview, published in the Times last Tuesday, a smirking Romano Prodi warns Britain not to 'go it alone' or else we shall pay the price of exclusion. He made clear his absolute commitment to the creation of a fully federal European superstate, in which the individual nations would cease to exist. He kindly acknowledges that Britain has different traditions, history and roots to the rest of the EU but then ignores this in his lust to fulfil his mission of creating the United States of Europe. He threatens our rebate, our national veto and the prosperity of the City of London but thinks that we should sacrifice all these in pursuit of the chimera of a united Europe. He concludes with the statement that it is up to Britain to decide whether to be in or out. Of course any sane Briton, except members of the self interested political class, would instantly respond 'Out it is!'. Unfortunately the politicians will defend their membership of the club to the death so it is not to be as easy as that.

We have only to look elsewhere in the media last week to see why it is madness to stay in the EU. Brussels is now threatening thousands of jobs at Rover's Longbridge plant by calling into question the government's aid package. This is yet another example of the determination of the EU to force de-industrialisation upon the UK, to the point where we would not be able to function as a separate economy and so would be unable to escape their clutches. This has not happened yet but we must get out before it does.

An even more blatant example of the destruction wrought upon this country by the EU is the new rules on fishing. Of course fish stocks are being depleted beyond the bounds of sense but why has this occurred? It is because Edward Heath, a man who makes Benedict Arnold look like an American patriot, agreed to the Common Fisheries Policy as part of the price of gaining entry to the EEC, something which would never have been too high for him. Now our fishermen see their livelihoods destroyed while trawlers from Spain and elsewhere hoover up the stocks which were previously within British waters and which we ensured were not overfished. The Times leader on the subject says that 'It is too late now to dismantle the CFP' but this timid statement takes no account of the fact that, were we to withdraw from the EU, we would also withdraw from the CFP, CAP and all the other confidence tricks which have so damaged our nation. We could then restore British fishing limits, exclude foreign trawlers, revive our own fishing industry and preserve fish stocks.

Our cowardly politicians refuse to accept that it is always possible for a policy to be reversed and what has been changed to be changed back. If we break free of the EU then we can also cancel the thousands of directives stifling our economy and, as most British people desire, reject metric measures in favour of a return to imperial. All it takes is the political will to place our democracy and national interests above those of the Brussels dictatorship.

In an interview on the World at One today the British Foreign Secretary parroted all the pro EU myths peddled by those such as Britain in Europe and then went on to claim that the British people would never vote to withdraw from the European Union. How this man every had the reputation of being sceptical about the EU is a mystery but he may be in for a big surprise in the future - the British electorate are not the dupes he takes them for!

The Times reports that a former anti-corruption judge is seeking to have Romano Prodi arraigned on corruption charges, despite a "conspiracy of silence" in the Ialian media.

Ferdinando Imposimato claims that Prodi "turned a blind eye" to mafia involvement in the construction of motorways and a high speed train project.

Judge Imposimato is from Prodi's own political camp, has focused on Prodi beacuse he fears that the mafia is gaining power not only in Italy, but throughout Europe, and is confident that eventually Prodi will face charges.

For us in the UK the question must be "What on earth are we doing in an organisation whose most senior official is under such suspicion?". It makes our domestic scandals look pretty insignificant but anyone who knows the European political scene knows that the extent of corruption is almost beyond belief. Yet another reason for getting out of the EU!

12/10/99

On Monday 6th December CIB City Branch was addressed by Geoff Martin, Unison London Convenor and leading member of 'Trade Unionists Against the Single Currency' (TASC). Unison is Britain's largest trade union, with over 1.3 million members and Geoff speaks as one who has spent his entire life in the trade union and Labour movement.

I have attempted to convey the points he made in as objective a way as possible but if I have misinterpreted any the fault is mine, not Geoff's.

He first came to realise that the single currency was a disaster for trade unionists when French and German colleagues detailed the impact it was having on their working conditions and, as he points out, all other union campaigns are undermined if there is no democratic accountability in the political process, for nothing can be changed if those in charge are not susceptible to public opinion.

For the last three years Unison has been clear in its opposition to the single currency and polls show that two thirds of all trade unionists are against its adoption. However the weight of patronage in the TUC presents a massive obstacle to enforcing the views of ordinary members on those who claim to speak for them at the seats of power. Sir Ken Jackson of the AEEU claims that the cost of not joining the Euro would include the loss of one million jobs when in fact the opposite is the truth. The unemployment in Euroland is in excess of eighteen million and all those with a memory longer than that of a gnat know that the ERM (the little brother of EMU) experiment cost the UK countless jobs and misery.

Geoff asserted that the overriding objection to the single currency is the loss of democratic accountability that it entails but believes that it is neither possible, nor desirable, that the anti EU movement should attempt to create one unified campaign. Instead each participating organisation should work to its own strengths and that, the longer we can delay the decision to join, the nearer that moment comes when the whole mad project will collapse.

When speaking to trade unionists Geoff emphasises that so many politicians are in favour of the EU because of the opportunity it gives them to join the Brussels gravy train, the Kinnocks being a case in point. He points out that the recent scandal within the European Commission was not dealt with, the procedure adopted being akin to asking the pigs to clean out the sty, and that the refusal of the European Central Bank to allow scrutinisation of its minutes is a disgrace.

He recalled the occasion at the BIFU conference when he debated the issues with a Europhile Labour member whose only argument seemed to be that we should not miss the boat. However when Geoff detailed what was on the boat the audience felt that perhaps they might prefer to miss it after all!

Geoff points out that the well publicised Public Finance Initiatives exist in order that the public accounts can be kept in line with Maastricht limits and for no other reason. The cause of the governments refusal to adopt bonds for the financing of the London Underground lies in their desire to obey their masters in Brussels, not because the policy has any intrinsic worth.

If the referendum is called then we may expect massive resources to be thrown on the side of the 'Yes' advocates, most of it being our own taxpayers money. Nevertheless we are holding the line at the moment and we must keep the messages simple and sincere.

The true horror of the single currency and other centralist schemes is that we are seeing the creation of a corporatist state, in which the trade union leaders, big businessmen, bureaucrats and politicians will form an immovable, self perpetuating elite. The last time we saw such a creation was in Mussolini's Italy.

Geoff Martin is the author of a pamphlet 'Trade Unions, Public Services and the Euro' which costs 2.50 and can be obtained from:

This week has seen so much public exposure of the iniquities of the European Union, and its disastrous effects on the UK that one wonders how anyone, other than the small minority who benefit from membership, and the certifiably insane, can still support our membership. Of course, as those two groups include most of our political 'leaders', it is perhaps not surprising that we are still pretending that we should remain within the club.

There were a number of articles in the Times on Thursday which illustrated the reasons why we should be making arrangements to withdraw forthwith:

The leader made clear the threat to the City posed by EU manoeuvring on the withholding tax, pointing out that the proposed compromise was "a classic Brussels manoeuvre: to get the principle accepted and refer detail - where the devil lurksto 'experts'". Aidan Rankin warns of the plans of the pan-European liberal elite for an unaccountable dictatorship, one paragraph in particular summing up the monster we face: "In the name of progress, we are building giant political structures in which few people believe and to which no one is loyal. Political union offers the end of habeas corpus, the introduction of identity cards, draconian immigration laws and the reduction of all freedoms except specious 'sexual freedom'. Parliament will be reduced to local council status and our Armed forces merged into Euro-legions."

Roger Scruton attacks the petty Europhile tyrants who are forcing the end of the imperial system of measurement, drawing a lesson from history: "The French Revolutionaries believed that, by changing weights and measures, calendars and festivals, street-names and landmarks, they could undermine the old and local attachments of the people, so as to conscript them behind their international purpose".

Sir Oliver Wright points out the peril in which NATO has been placed by EU ambitions for a common defence policy, a French journalist details the reluctance of the his nation to face the realities of the Euro and, on the front page, a report illustrates the cynical intransigence of France over the beef issue.

The papers on Friday and Saturday are full of the arguments in Helsinki and Tony Blair for once sounds like Mrs Thatcher saying "If we are isolated and we are in the right, then that's the correct position".

It is now obvious that, after thirty years of sleepwalking to disaster the British people stand on the very edge of the abyss. Unless they awake, and turn back from the path to European integration, the UK will cease to exist within the first few years of the new millennium and British culture and national identity will be expunged from these islands. This week will be a good one for the cause of British freedom and independence, provided that the lessons are drawn and the inevitable conclusions reached, and acted upon. If the British should choose to continue to live in a dream world then perhaps they will deserve the fate which would then overtake them. Now is the hour!

10/12/99

We in the Eurorealist movement can view with some satisfaction the vindication of our warnings as the steady slide of the Euro takes it to parity with the dollar, although the damage being inflicted upon some of our major trading partners is a worry for the future. Of course, economically, a fall in a value of a currency is not necessarily a bad thing, making it easier for the country concerned to export. However the whole point of the Euro is that it is not an economic, but a political project, without which the federalists cannot build their beloved United States of Europe, and now all can see that the wishful thinking of idiot politicians will not influence economic realities one iota.

Gullible dupes who rushed to involve themselves in euro loans are now paying the price while the psychological damage suffered by the whole project may very well lead those financiers, who foolishly believed in the pronouncements of the politicians a year ago and invested in Euroland, to withdraw and to damage the Euro even further. How the German people, who set such store by a strong mark, will react to these events is as yet unknown but the future of the single currency certainly looks black. If Tony Blair can show some backbone and refuse to compromise on German demands to accede to the withholding tax and Herr Schroder goes ahead with his promise to impose such a tax in Germany then we shall see the collapse of the Frankfurt financial market as the capital is transferred to Switzerland, and, one expects, to the City of London.

Every day that passes shows how foolish the British people would be to vote for inclusion in Euroland and hastens that moment when the single currency finally collapses, perhaps, one hopes, bringing the whole EU down with it. Politicians, knowing little of economics, chose to gamble on the Euro and with any luck will soon lose their shirt, their support and their whole plan to substitute bureaucratic dictatorship for democracy throughout Europe.

A small band of Eurorealists from CIB, the Democracy Movement and UKIP was at Waterloo station on Wednesday to greet the return from Paris of comedian Eddie Izzard and his straight man Keith Vaz. We were joined by Marc Glendening, campaign manager of the Democracy Movement, who had used the trip on the Eurostar to engage the pair in debate and we ensured that the press were aware of our presence, Brian Smalley of UKIP being successful in obtaining an interview on camera.

The reception was enlivened by the presence of a motley band of 'Britain in Europe' supporters, including Sir Anthony Meyer and Hugh Dykes. While these latter politicians have a vested interest in the UK remaining within the EU, as the political class are the only real beneficiaries, the other Europhiles present typified what Lenin described as 'useful idiots'. They stand to gain nothing, and eventually to lose everything, by our remaining in the EU but they are nevertheless vociferous in their support for the dictators of Brussels, attacking us with venom. While at the time, when seeing their red faces and hearing their ludicrous statements one feels both anger and contempt, on reflection one should feel pity for them as they are unquestionably sincere although totally wrong on the fundamental issues. The anger should really be reserved for those who deliberately deceive the British people, knowing that their case is based on lies and a cold calculation of their own self interest.

Although there were only a few of us there we must ensure that our activists are always present to prevent the Europhiles pretending that they speak for the majority. One nice touch was that Marc Glendening was heckling the Vaz party in French, making clear that xenophobia plays no part in our campaign.

04/12/99

One of the stoutest defenders of our parliamentary democracy, Tony Benn, tabled an Early Day Motion with cross party support on November 9th. Among those supporting him were CIB vice Chairman Austin Mitchell and well known Euro realists Bill Cash and Richard Shepherd. Although the motion does not directly mention the European Union it is undoubtedly EU membership which is steadily undermining the powers of the Houses of Parliament and the principles which Mr Benn is seeking to defend are central to the fight against the federal superstate.

The motion itself reads as follows:

That this House notes:

The emergence of a semi-Presidential style of government, by-passing the Cabinet and taking this House for granted, with few effective checks and balances on the power of the executive;

Further, notes: the development of closer front bench links between parties as with appointment of Liberal Democrats to a cabinet consultative committee, and the establishment of a high-level all-party Britain in Europe committee; notes:

The tendency of the leadership of all parties to centralise power at the top and expect unquestioning support from their own backbenchers for whatever proposals they bring forward, even where these were not the subject of any prior consultation with colleagues, nor were put to the electorate in the last election; notes:

The growing public cynicism about parliament and politics which these practices have encouraged, which may damage the reputation of parliament itself; and

Therefore invites all members, while honouring their personal and political obligations and loyalty to their own party and the manifesto on which they were elected, to speak and vote more freely in the House on the proposals put before them, and by doing so to reassert their historic role as elected representatives, their rights and duty to express their own deeply held convictions and their responsibility for maintaining the role of this House as a democratic legislature holding all governments to account, having been elected by the people for that purpose.

We should never forget that Winston Churchill, in the darkest days of the Second World War, when he was supreme War leader with the responsibilities of the survival of the British nation upon his shoulders, still acknowledged the duty he owed to parliament and treated it with the respect it deserved as the ultimate expression of the people's will.

Now we see the executive ignoring the House of Commons and seem set fair to be ruled by a bunch of adolescent spivs, expert in the lying arts of public relations and spin-doctoring but neither knowing, nor caring, about the democratic rights of the people. The poison is not confined to one party but has infected them all.

All democrats should give thanks that we still have principled politicians such as Mr Benn to speak up for those democratic rights. The unelected rulers of the European Union want nothing better than the emasculation of the Houses of Parliament and only a few brave MPs are prepared to defend our accountable democracy.

The full list of those supporting the motion is:

Tony Benn, Austin Mitchell, Bill Cash, Richard Shepherd, David Davis, Martin Bell, Andrew Mckinlay, Sir Edward Taylor, Dennis Canavan, Bob Marshall-Andrews, Alan Simpson, Sir Peter Tapsell

On Wednesday 24th November the Daily Telegraph carried a front page story that the car manufacturers Ford, Fiat and Rover had said that they would transfer their plants away from the UK if we did not sign up to the single currency.

The French are continuing to prove themselves the best friends of the anti EU movement in the UK by their actions over British beef. At the same time as they expose the lie that the Europhile's grovelling to Brussels produces gains for Britain they illustrate that a nation's government should stand up for its own people, not kow tow to supranational institutions in the hope that they may be thrown the odd crumb by those seated at the top table.

We are constantly told by the Europhiles that we must put up with whatever the other members chose to do to us because we gain so much from being part of 'the club' but what exactly are these advantages?

• Economic?
  • We have traded at an increasing loss with the rest of the EU since we joined. Only our surplus in trade with the rest of the world has enabled us to remain solvent
  • We have allowed our fishing grounds to be declared a 'common resource' with the result that our fishing industry is decimated while Spanish ships are given free rein to despoil our stocks
  • The Common Agricultural Policy distorts our countryside and ensures that our people pay more than necessary for food
• Political?
  • We exchange the strength of running our own affairs, dealing with other nations on an equal footing, for the pleasure of acting as a province of superstate, our politicians making shoddy backroom deals with their Continental counterparts behind our backs
  • We are in the process of losing our democratic system, where the people are the masters, in exchange for a bureaucratic dictatorship by the political class
  • If Corpus Juris is imposed upon us we shall see our system of Common Law replaced by the Napoleonic inquisitorial model and lose both habeas corpus and the right of trial by jury
• Peace?
  • The peace in Europe since 1945 is the result of the largely American, British and Canadian troops of NATO and is nothing to do with the European Union
  • The imposition of this forced federal superstate will eventually provoke civil wars as people struggle to retrieve their lost freedoms

The truth is that the only reason that we have joined the EU, and stayed in despite it becoming clear just what a disaster it is, is that it is in the personal interests of politicians, bureaucrats and big business that we do so. These people are prepared to sacrifice everything decent about our country in the relentless pursuit of their own self interest.

The people of the UK are being taken for fools, lied to, deceived and being led by the nose into a European superstate which will destroy their democracy, their prosperity and their whole way of life.

It is only when those such as the French government let the truth become clear that the British people wake from the sleep, into which their own politicians have deliberately lulled them, so we must be grateful that at times Gallic cynicism overcomes their need to keep up the pretence that the EU is a boon for its peoples, rather than a trap.

Neville Chamberlain, Samuel Hoare and Lord Halifax would be proud of the adherence the current government has shown to the policy of appeasement of which they were such exponents. In a display of political cowardice the British government has backed down in the face of French intransigence over the beef ban and agreed to yet more concessions. We are constantly told that the rules of the European Union mean that the French must accept the decision of the Commission and allow British beef into France yet they refuse to do so and our spineless politicians, who will sacrifice anything, rather than admit that the EU is a fraud and a sham, are once again placing their own interests above those of the nation.

How much more proof do the British electorate need that the British political class are hell-bent on destroying this country merely in order that they may continue to ride the Brussels gravy train?

A poll published yesterday reveals that 51% of respondents now support the idea of the UK leaving the European Union. As Eurorealists are shown to be in the majority who are the extremists now - those who want to ignore the will of the people or those who are determined to save this country's sovereignty and democracy from destruction by the bureaucratic monster of Brussels?

Europhiles must realise in their heart of hearts that, as the British people wake up to the realities of the European Union, support for their federal project is only going to decline. We have passed the watershed and it is a matter of when, not if, the UK withdraws from the EU.

No-one has emerged from the beef war unscathed. The disgusting animal husbandry practices adopted by all participants have long deserved condemnation. However the central issue of the Anglo-French dispute is not food safety but the right, indeed duty, of a government to act in the interest of its people. That the French choose to do this is in fact laudable, in particular because it exposes the European Union as a sham, the absence of a common European identity ensuring that allegiance cannot be transferred from a nation to a pan European federal state.

There is a great deal of nonsense talked about the animosity between the French and the British but the truth is that, while we often differ greatly, and have fought many wars against each other in the past, we have more in common with each other than we do with many other nations throughout the world, the old empire territories excepted. Unlike Germany, France and Britain experienced the civilising influence of the Roman Empire, a legacy which helped shape our psyches, and we have been nation states for centuries, again unlike the Germans and Italians who have only been united for little more than a century. We share a long history, have influenced each other greatly and at bottom believe in much the same civilized values, fighting side by side against the worst tyrannies of this century.

None of the above make it necessary, or desirable, that Britain and France submerge their unique identities in a European superstate and, if anything is certain, it is that the French have no intention of placing the EU treaties above their national interests. The lesson for the British is obvious. We must end the pursuit of the chimera of a united Europe, withdraw from the EU and return to the methods which served us so well for centuries, concluding trade agreements with other nations on the basis of individual statehood.

On a related matter the leader writer of the London Evening Standard appears to regard the postponement of the introduction of the 'droit de suite' tax on art sales as a triumph for those who advocate the brokering of deals via the councils of the European Union. Is it not obvious that were this country to be free of the suffocating embrace of this bureaucratic monster we would be able to take such decisions for ourselves, as indeed do Switzerland, Norway or any other normal independent nation. The fact that we have had to fight this battle at all is because of our membership of the EU.

That the clear, and inevitable course of withdrawal will only take place after years of agonising is due to the British political establishment placing their own selfish interests before those of the nation and its people. They will not easily alight from the Brussels gravy train but the forces of history will eventually make such an outcome irresistible.

In blatant contempt of British law, which states that there must be "...Neither compulsion nor coercion..." to use the (so-called) "euro", an impudent ultimatum has been issued to British suppliers of parts to Rover cars that they must with immediate effect bill in euros or lose their contracts. This is an attempt to undermine and subvert the British pound sterlingand at the same time a tacit admission that the euro is an unmitigated failure. As the British pound soars to new heights against the euro, this is a way for the EU manufacturers to transfer costs to their British suppliers and ever larger amounts of wealth and power from Britain to themselves. As the euro continues its fall against the pound - suppliers will lose money - unless they insist that their suppliers also bill in euros. Which they will, of course, have no choice but to do. On receiving payment in euros - no such currency exists - the British suppliers will then have to change them back into pounds sterling - at a loss. No euro notes or coins are in circulation- even in euroland - nor will be before 2002. So they cannot pay their workforce in euros - which are not legal tender in Britain - and will not be even after 2002.

This is the insolent enforcement of a non-existent foreign currency by an EU car manufacturer on a whole British city. They are attempting to force Birmingham into becoming a "eurozone" obliged to use a currency which does not even exist - and will not exist - even in the EU's so-called "eurozone" before 2002! They are also demanding that their British suppliers shall reduce prices by 20% per year for the foreseeable future. This will, naturally, result in them going bankrupt and then, surprise, surprise, all car parts will naturally have to be imported. After which, of course, Rover will itself be closed down - completing the destruction of the British mass car manufacturing industry - as planned by the EU who do not want any focus of British national pride or identity.

In the aftermath of the Munich surrender in 1938 Churchill made a memorable speech in which he said "I find unendurable the sense of our country falling into the power, into the orbit and influence of Nazi Germany, and of our existence becoming dependent upon their goodwill or pleasure." This week those who believe in the future of the UK as an independent, democratic country felt the same sense of sadness and anger when they heard politicians claiming that they were putting country before party as they lent their names to a policy of surrender worthy of Vichy France, and one which, if successful, will see our nation being dependent upon the goodwill or pleasure of the unelected bureaucrats of Brussels. As the Times reported from Brussels "Officials mock the idea that Britain could rewrite the terms of membership without the EU unravelling, but are concerned about where it might lead. Referring to Herr Haider (Austria' far right leader) one said: "People here have experience of seeing extremism turn into something dangerous".

We, without whom Europe would have fallen to totalitarian rule, now have to endure lectures from Continental bureaucrats about our right to defend our freedoms and democracy. It is not extremist to believe that the UK should retain its sovereignty and, were we to follow the logical course of withdrawing from the EU, this would not be 'dangerous' but merely a reassertion of our age old status as an independent nation state.

If Churchill were to return today he would be in the forefront of those opposed to EU membership and the petty pygmies who now masquerade as statesmen would be recognized as nothing more than self interested frauds.

It is appropriate that the launch of 'Britain in Europe' should take place on the same day that Prodi announces his plans for the creation of the federal state which, if successful, will ensure that there will no longer be a Britain at all. The politicians who smugly proclaim that they are 'putting country before party' are in fact putting the selfish interest of the professional political class before any other consideration. Even now we see the supine response of the European Commission to the French refusal to accept British beef while in Birmingham British companies are being threatened by the German firm BMW that if they do not invoice in euros, a currency which does not even yet exist, they will lose the business which they have provided to Rover for generations.

The Europhiles are now coming out openly as a group which transcends any political loyalty in order that they may advance their careers through cosy appointments, rather than having to face the ballot box. No better example can be found than Chris Patten who proceeds smoothly from one post to another, his path made clear by cronies. This is the future for our democracy if we stay within the European Union and is the reason why we should be straining every nerve to ensure that in the end we achieve 'Britain in the World' rather than aiming at provincial status within an undemocratic European superstate.

14/10/99

The Liberal Democrat Conference agenda contains the following item

Time	17:00 - 18:30
	The Foreign Policy Centre and The BBC World Service
	Europe: Winning the Argument
Speakers	Lord Jenkins of Hillhead
	Baroness Nicholson MEP
	Mark Leonard of the FPC

It is a national disgrace that the BBC world service is directly associating itself with one side of the argument concerning the UK's relationship with the European Union. It reveals the extent to which the BBC increasingly acts as a mouthpiece for those who wish to see our country submerged in a European superstate

In his speeches at the Liberal Democrat conference Charles Kennedy again exposes the contradiction that lies at the heart of their policies. How can anyone of a liberal disposition support bureaucratic rule by appointed Commissioners, resembling, in their arrogance and unaccountability, Stalinist Commissars, instead of democratic government by elected representatives. How can a liberal prefer a parliament whose members are given 90 seconds to speak, whose individual constituencies run into the hundreds of thousands and who claim to represent a European identity that does not exist, to the mother of parliaments where the members have real power, represent a manageable number of electors and are truly accountable to the electorate. The Liberal Democrats have been seduced by a monster and, unless they break free of the enchantment, they will be forever ranged on the side of the political elite and multi national business against the democrats and people they claim to represent.

The sorry story of the European Union continues as normal. The hypocrisy that surrounds so many of its activities surfaced once again when Gordon Brown warned the EU finance ministers that he would reject the implementation of a withholding tax unless the UK was granted exemption for the City of London. Although their own rules allow an individual nation to veto such proposals the federalists have reacted by describing any such action as 'unacceptable' and 'lacking credibility'. Clearly it is all right for a veto to exist as long as you don't use it! This matter is now coming to a head and Mr Brown will soon be unable to avoid either making good his threat or else abjectly retreating and sacrificing the interests of Britain on the altar of 'being a good European'. The course he chooses will be instructive as to his real beliefs.

The arrogance of the European civil servants knows no bounds, the lessons of the Santer Commission obviously being lost on the smug, and bullying, Romano Prodi. He has railroaded his choice of Commissioners through the European Parliament, ignoring all objections raised to the suitability of some of the appointees. He has not merely included some members of the disgraced former Commission, he has also put forward others whose probity has been questioned in their own countries. The Sunday Times reports that Phillipe Busquin, a Belgian, has lied to MEPs concerning his involvement in a corruption scandal yet Prodi refuses to accept the right of the parliament to reject any individual. The MEPs have been kept short of time for interviewing the nominees and follow up questions have been banned. Whenever the MEPs attempted to reign Prodi in he simply threatened to resign if he did not get his own way! Can anyone in their right minds imagine the Head of the Home Civil Service dictating to MPs in such a manner? Prodi is supposed to be a civil servant but acts, in common with most Continental bureaucrats, as if he possessed the legitimacy conferred by the ballot box.

The cowardice shown by the European Parliament in the face of Prodi's arrogance gives the lie to all the exaggerated claims that it was somehow asserting its authority over the Commission. Instead it is revealed once again as a meaningless talking shop, whose only raison d'etre is to provide a smokescreen of pseudo democracy, behind which the European political elite continue to construct a bureaucratic dictatorship.

Two recent articles appearing in the Times require some response as they give a false picture of the position of the opposition to the EU.

Michael Grove appears basically sympathetic to the case for the UK considering withdrawal from the EU as a valid option but he somewhat spoils the effect by asserting that, while the pragmatic case is compelling, idealists can only be found in the pro EU camp. In this he is very mistaken, as we who have opposed the involvement of the UK in the European project ever since its inception are motivated by an idealistic, indeed fervent, belief in the democracy the British people have spent so many centuries evolving. Our parliamentary system, enabling the electorate to hold their political masters accountable, and successfully exported to many nations, is a jewel beyond price and must not be sacrificed on the altar of European integration and bureaucratic rule from Brussels. It is gratifying that pragmatic arguments reinforce our contention that the UK must withdraw from the EU but, even if the reverse were true, we would still stand by that principle, as our belief in the ideals on which our freedoms are founded are not for sale. Our vision for the nation's future is as idealistic as any the federalists may claim but is firmly based on our past achievements and present strengths, not on the pursuit of a chimera.

Despite his frequently voiced, and very sensible, doubts about the Euro Anatole Kaletsky produced an attack on those wishing to withdraw from the EU worthy of a federalist. He claimed that the issue had been settled by the 1975 referendum and that any referendum held on the EU would support continued membership, asserted that a nation can remain within the EU but outside EMU and advocated a kind of internal Turkish bazaar where, one assumes, we hand our fishing grounds to Spain in order that they may graciously support our beef exports. This latter point is easily answered as our long, and successful, history of dealing with nation states around the world shows that such shabby deals would be unnecessary and that we should always retain our right to determine our own fate.

As far as his other points are concerned the belief that UK membership of the European Union was decided forever by the 1975 vote is false, that exercise being sold to the British people as an issue of continued membership of the European Economic Community, an economic free trade area, not one of support for a putative federal state. Such dedicated anti federalists as Dr Alan Sked, Sir James Goldsmith and Baroness Thatcher were in the "Yes" camp and endless contemporary opponents of the EU can relate how they were totally misled and never would have voted for membership of a political superstate.

The idea that a nation can remain within the EU while declining to join the single currency is also an illusion. The architects of the United States of Europe, and their acolytes within the European political elite, are constructing a single state, which will have only one currency, one system of law, one army and one government. To imagine that the UK can remain for ever half in and half out of this entity is as ridiculous as believing that the USA would allow Kansas and Utah to remain within the union but decline to accept the American dollar as their currency.

If a fair referendum were held on the future of Britain, to be either an independent democratic nation, or a province of a bureaucratic European federal state, Kaletsky might be surprised by the result, as the British people always awake at the eleventh hour and they are now clearly realising the truth about the EU.

What the media, including basically sympathetic columnists, have yet to recognize is that, as Lenin said, "You are either with us or against us". There is only one choice before the British people and there is no third way by which the issue can be endlessly fudged - do we give up Britain and parliamentary democracy or do we not? If the answer is no then we must withdraw from the EU!

Once again Tony Benn has put forward the democratic case for opposing EMU in a clear and concise manner. It is worth quoting parts of his letter, recently published in the Daily Telegraph, in which he defends the right of MPs to vote with their conscience on this most important of matters'

"The deeply held beliefs of MPs in all parties, openly and consistently expressed and free of personal malice, is central to democracy. For that reason I deeply resent the abuse levelled by those who have set up this new all-party "Patriotic Alliance"- supported by the Prime Minister, Michael Heseltine, Paddy Ashdown and others - suggesting that those who oppose EMU are narrow, backward-looking nationalists and extremists.

The arguments used by the "Patriotic Alliance" that the whole future of our parliamentary system can be determined by the speed with which we achieve convergence between our economies, as determined by the Treasury, is both absurd and dangerous.

I believe that most of those who object to the centralised federal Europe that is being constructed, from the top, in Brussels, believe that, if we hand over our future to commissioners, bankers and bureaucrats, whom we did not elect and cannot remove, it will destroy democracy here and in every other country in the European Union.

Many of those who take this view would welcome any initiative designed to allow us to co-operate and harmonise our policies, across the whole continent, east and west, at the pace set by each national parliament, elected by its own people working together in some loose Commonwealth of European Nations.

This is the time to make it clear to all party leaders that, in any proposals affecting our relations with Europe, there should be free votes in the House of Commons and whips should be called off."

Those whose only argument is to call their opponent xenophobes should be shamed by the contrast to these words of one of the leading champions of our parliamentary democracy.

To call the association of those seeking to end the UK's existence as an independent nation the "Patriotic Alliance" is truly Orwellian, standing alongside the "Ministry of Love" as a name representing the opposite of the truth.

The all party Public Accounts Committee today published the results of its investigation into the European Commission and its findings will be no surprise to those in the Eurorealist movement. The main findings were as follows:

• Despite the scandal which led to the mass resignation of the EC earlier this year it lacks the political will to stamp out fraud and waste in the Brussels bureaucracy

• An attitude of avoiding personal responsibility runs throughout the commission

• A culture of complacency has been allowed to develop over financial irregularities

• The Commission is more concerned with rebutting criticism than implementing reforms

• Officers persistently refused to accept blame

The report points out that the incompetence and corruption was only revealed by the courage of Paul van Buitenan yet he remains suspended and has not been reinstated to his post. The MPs found that "there was a general reluctance among those that we saw to acknowledge that Mr Van Buitenan's actions had been necessary".

The committee Chairman, David Davis, who is a former Conservative Minister for Europe, said the Commission faced a "monumental challenge" to restore public confidence and that "We were staggered by the scale and extent of the problem and the ingrained culture of complacency".

Of course those who, unlike the British political elite, see the EU and all its works clearly, and without the rose tinted spectacles, would not be staggered, merely recognizing the confirmation of all that we have said about the whole misbegotten project. The faults of the European Commission are not unique to it but are to be found whenever a bureaucracy exists untroubled by any democratic control. The problems lie in the essential nature of the EU and its institutions and can never be solved as those bodies are designed to be as they are so that the political elite can govern without accountability to the peoples of Europe.

The structure of the EU owes much to the French model, where the bureaucrats and politicians are all drawn from the same political class and who reject with contempt the ideals of Anglo-Saxon democracy. If we in the UK wish to avoid rule by corrupt and incompetent bureaucrats in Brussels there is only one way - withdraw from the EU and leave the Continentals to their own devices. If we do not then these arrogant people will one day be in a position to prevent any House of Commons committee daring to report on their activities and we shall all pay the price of allowing our democracy to be subverted.

The lie, propagated by the media, that only those on the right of politics are opposed to 'ever closer union' in the EU, is to be publicly exposed at the TUC conference next month when Bill Morris of the TGWU and Rodney Bickerstaffe of Unison are to lead the opposition to the TUC joining any campaign for the UK to sign up to the single currency.

They have come to realise, unlike new Labour dupes in the GMB and AEEU, that the EU is fundamentally orientated towards the interests of big business and the multi nationals, and that the interests of the working class demand that Britain does not involve itself further in the federalist project. It is reported in the Sunday Times that the report on EMU, commissioned last year in order to postpone a showdown on the issue, has now arrived and does not support the maniacally pro euro position of the TUC general secretary, John Monks.

We have now reached the position that those who 'Speak for England' include trade union secretaries and the Socialist Labour Party of Arthur Scargill while those most anxious to sacrifice, in pursuit of a chimera, all that this nation has achieved over the centuries include such Conservative luminaries as Clarke and Heseltine. As Mrs Thatcher said it connection with a different matter 'It's a funny old world!'.

Reports in today's newspapers reveal that at long last Baroness Thatcher has committed herself completely to the anti EU cause. At a recent private dinner she was asked whether she was no in favour of pulling out of the EU altogether, to which she replied "Of course I am; it has been an absolute disaster". It is very much to be regretted that she took so long to come to this conclusion, having campaigned in favour of a "Yes" vote in 1975, signing the Single European Act as Prime Minister and allowed her Cabinet to push Britain into the ERM in her last days of power.

However, those of us who have been opposed to UK involvement in the European project since the days of Macmillan can only be pleased that the Conservative party is moving towards repentance of its sins and that so many who voted Yes in 1975, including Baroness Thatcher, Sir James Goldsmith and Dr Sked of UKIP, have since experienced Damascene conversions to the anti federalist cause. Nevertheless the media do that cause no favours by implying that this is an issue only for the Conservatives, and those of a right wing persuasion. This is not a matter of right and left, but of right and wrong, and it transcends party politics. It should not be forgotten that the true heroes, and heroines, of the British resistance, include many from the Labour party such as the Lords Shore and Stoddart, whose principled opposition has never wavered, while large numbers of trade unionists and socialists are totally opposed to British association with the monster slouching towards Brussels to be born.

A belief in democracy and government accountable to the people is not confined to the Conservative Eurorealists, as is evidenced by the stance taken by, among others, the old Liberal Party and the Socialist Labour Party. The true divide is between those who wish Britain's future to be as an independent, sovereign democracy and those who wish her to be a province of a federal state, governed by bureaucratic diktat. It is time that the media recognized that this division is not catered for by the current structure of the party system, rather than relying on old stereotypes which do not reflect the reality.

There is still time for Baroness Thatcher to atone for her past acquiescence with the moves to submerge the UK in a federal state by campaigning openly and vigorously for British withdrawal and to join hands with those in other parties who feel the same, whatever differences may exist on other policies.

The reaction of various EU governments, particularly the Germans, to the lifting of the ban on British Beef is a perfect illustration of how the British people are being taken for fools by their so called 'partners' and by the fifth column within their own political elite. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the BSE affair (and if we were all independent nations then we could each decide these matters for ourselves), the principle upon which the EU is supposed to operate is that the individual governments have to abide by the decision of the Commission on matters such as this. When they decreed in their wisdom that British Beef was not to be sold anywhere in the world (and until that happened how many outside the anti EU movement really realised just how much sovereignty had already passed to Brussels) the British complied, at enormous cost to their farmers. When the fishing grounds were signed away by Heath our fishing industry was forced to accept the destruction of their livelihood. However, when it suits other governments to ignore the decisions of the EC, they calmly do so, knowing that any sanctions will be a long time coming and will anyway not be more than a slap on the wrist when Germany or France is involved.

Of course, the anti EU movement does not accept the legitimacy of the dictatorship of the Commission on any subject so to that degree we sympathise with the Germans. However, if we are to suffer such outrages against our democratic rights to decide matters for ourselves then so should all the other nations who seem to embrace the concept of the EU so enthusiastically.

As usual it is one rule for us and one rule for the rest and the sooner we wake up and get out of the whole rotten mess the better.

A small incident which took place during the European Election campaign may have vast significance for the future of democracy in this country. A supporter of UKIP was arrested in Liverpool for placing a poster on a derelict wall with blue tac and charged with racially motivated criminal damage. That the police should equate opposition to the UK's remaining within the EU as a racial issue is enough to send a cold chill down the spine of every democrat in this country. It is regrettable that the anti fascist magazine Searchlight should also take this line when it speaks of the anti EU cause as if it were merely an issue relating to far right politics. The democratic opposition to the EU are not actuated by base motives of xenophobia but by our love of freedom and of the parliamentary system which we have spent so long building in this country.

If one looks at those who have been most vociferous in their support for UK withdrawal one finds they includes Arthur Scargill, whose election broadcast was admirable in its summing up of the iniquities of the EU; the Labour peer Lord Stoddart (Chairman of CIB); the ex Labour minister Lord Shore, one of the most passionate and valiant fighters in the cause; Tony Benn, champion of the left; as well as numerous Labour MPs such as Denzil Davis and Austin Mitchell. No one in their right mind could believe that they are anything but sincere and honourable in their beliefs and that they would reject contemptuously any idea that this is a matter of race.

We are on the slippery slope to the nightmare of 1984 where it will become 'crimethink' to oppose Britain's membership of the EU, and the political elite will use the law to oppress those who dare to believe that this country should remain independent of their beloved United States of Europe. It has already been proposed in the European Parliament that a law be passed making criticism of the European Commission illegal.

We fought desperately, and successfully, to defeat the fascists during World War II but now we see the army of Quislings among the political elite determined to destroy our democracy and replace it with a bureaucratic dictatorship; anyone who loves freedom must raise their voices now if we are not to see it disappear.

The UKIP supporter arrested accepted a caution but is now taking libel action against the police, something which all members of the anti EU movement must pray will be successful. The Democracy Movement and the trade union pressure group, Campaign Against Euro Federalism, have supported this individual, something which shows how ludicrous the charges were in the first place - organisations composed of those who support democracy and those who support trade union rights do not range themselves on the side of those motivated by racism!

If our media were anything but the slaves of fashion opinions, and of the prejudices of the chattering classes, they would have raised Cain about this incident but, as usual, they played the part of the dog which didn't bark in the night. It is left to us to make clear that it is we, not the federalists, who are on the side of the angels for the state they seek to build will be the antithesis of the democracy we seek to defend.

The Anti-Common Market league is sponsoring a meeting in Committee Room 17, House of Commons (St Stephens Entrance) on Thursday 22nd July 1999 at 7.00 p.m. at which Laurence Robertson M.P. and James Lewis (Travel writer and businessman) will speak on Is the EU the potential Soviet Union of Western Europe? All are welcome.

Press reports on the second Congress for Democracy concentrated on rebukes to Howard Flight, Conservative front bench spokesman, for being no more than honest and intellectually consistent in observing that if the UK declines to join the single currency it would mean that our relationship to the EU would be fundamentally changed and that it would be the first step to leaving the organisation altogether. This provoked the Euromaniac Simon Buckby, Britain in Europe's campaign manager, into declaring that Mr Flight "has revealed the secret agenda of those fanatics hostile to the single currency". Of course this statement reveals Mr Buckby to be singularly ill informed, even for a Europhile, as the agenda of the Campaign for an Independent Britain, UKIP, the Campaign against Euro Federalism and many other like minded groups is not secret but is shouted from the rooftops, as anyone with any intelligence knows full well. If Mr Buckby would like it repeated again:

Continued membership of the European Union will spell disaster for the prosperity and democracy of the United Kingdom. We want a future as a self governing parliamentary democracy, an independent nation and a member of the world community, not as a province of a European federal superstate, ruled by an unelected and immovable bureaucratic elite. As no degree of reform can change the essentially anti-democratic nature of the EU we seek the COMPLETE WITHDRAWAL OF THE UK FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION".

I trust that statement sets Mr Buckby's mind at rest as to our aims. He should note that we do not seek to be anti-European, but anti-EU, and that we are quite happy to trade with all nations, including those within euroland, but that we do not feel the need to surrender our sovereignty in order to do so.

The other feature of the attacks on Mr Flight were accusations, by Mr Buckby, and other EU apologists, was the claim that those who dare to oppose the received wisdom about the supposed benefits of EU membership were variously maniacs, fanatics or extremists. These epithets, coming from those whose devotion to the mad cause of Euro federalism, are laughable, as can be illustrated by the following:

Let us suppose that, in the 1960s, a politician had made the following proposition:

The UK should, over the next fifty years:

• Sign up to a Common Fisheries Policy which would place British fishing grounds at the disposal of the rest of Europe and would lead to the destruction of our own fishing industry

• Sign up to a Common Agricultural Policy which would distort our countryside, create vast wine lakes and wheat mountains, cause the average British family to pay twenty pounds a week more for their food than would otherwise be necessary and allow others to determine whether our products could be sold around the world

• Stab our friends and allies in the Commonwealth in the back in order to ingratiate ourselves with the French and Germans

• Allow thousands of laws and regulations to be made by unelected Brussels bureaucrats and imposed on the UK without the right of our own elected representatives to prevent such a thing from happening

• Sign up to an economic and monetary union which would transfer, inter alia, fiscal control, the right to levy taxes and the setting of interest rates to bankers in Frankfurt

• Accept the imposition of the inquisitorial Napoleonic code in place of our Common Law, ending the rights of trial by jury and habeas corpus, and giving foreign courts the right to remove Her Majesty's subjects from the UK, without interference by our own courts

• Sign up to a common defence and foreign policy which would prevent us going to the aid of those such as the Falkland Islanders, commit our troops to a European army to fight wars which have nothing to do with us and to give up our place on the UN Security Council

• Give up our electoral system for one in which the party managers determine who are to be the "people's representatives", a rotten system, endemic in Europe

• Transform our independent nation in a province (or rather a series of administrative regions) within a federal state, ruled from Brussels and dominated by a bureaucratic dictatorship

Such a man would not have been regarded as an extremist, merely as one who was clearly mentally ill and who should be consigned to a lunatic asylum for his own good.

We are now in the situation that the lunatics are running the asylum and that those of us who point out that the Emperor has no clothes are derided as extremists while those who seek to achieve the objectives listed above are within sight of success, having attained some and being well on the way to others. As Lord Shore said in his speech to the second Congress of Democracy "If to believe in democracy, freedom and the independence of my country makes me an extremist than I am happy to be so regarded". Of course it is not Lord Shore and the Eurorealist movement that is extreme but those who worship at the altar of Eurofederalism and who would sacrifice everything good about this country in order to create the federal superstate of which they dream.

George Orwell knew all about the way in which language can be distorted in order to deceive and there is no doubt that our opponents are experts in the use of 'Newspeak'. If you seek extremists and fanatics look to the Europhiles, not to those who speak for the vast majority of the British people in their desire to protect all that has been gained at such cost over so many centuries and which is now at such risk.

This has been a bad week for those in Britain who love to hate their own country, in particular those who cannot wait to see her subsumed within a federal European state. The continuing success of the UK economy, which last year took over fifth place in the world from Italy, is now expected to allow us to pass France and become the fourth largest in the world, exceeded only by the USA, Japan and Germany.

This is the same country which the little Europeans claim is incapable of standing by herself and must bow the knee to Brussels in order to become part of the United States of Europe. While it is true that the British Empire no longer, as did Caesar, bestride the world like a Colossus, this does not mean that Britain has become a supplicant nation, dependent on others in order to succeed. Free of the dead hand of the EU bureaucracy we have the resources to prosper in the 21st century and to help those less fortunate, both within these islands, and in the wider world beyond.

We should be confident in the qualities of our people, stand firm and refuse to listen to the siren voices of those who worship at the altar of European federalism. If anyone tells you that this country is finished, and needs French and German help to survive, point out that we have a bigger economy than China, Brazil or Canada and that, if Germany continues to stagnate within euroland, we shall overtake them too, unless we commit economic and democratic suicide by joining EMU.

05/07/99