Those who doubt the intentions of the political class to replace Common Law with the Napoleonic code of Corpus Juris should take note of recent developments. Not only have we heard constantly of proposals to restrict the right of trial by jury, we are now faced with the Prime Minister advocating the end of the double jeopardy rule. Do not believe that this has anything to do with a desire to make justice fairer in Britain. It is nothing more than a further move towards implementing the diktats of Brussels. When one adds to this the European arrest warrant mentioned below, and the revival today of interest in ID cards, one can see clearly that the Europhiles wish this country's ancient protections against the arrogance of the ruling classes to be destroyed, so that the ordinary British citizen will be in the same position as those on the continent, where police demands for 'papers' are an unavoidable part of life and where civil freedoms are of less importance than the powers of the state.

30/06/2002

While the British people's attention was elsewhere their government has agreed the final form of the European arrest warrant, leaving parliament powerless to block or amend the measure.

The warrant was formally adopted at a meeting of the Justice and Home Affairs Council and so becomes part of European law, to be implemented in Britain, and escaping from any scrutiny by the elected representatives of the people.

As detailed previously in these pages the arrest warrant will be used by the EU to suppress all opposition to the diktats of Brussels. Indeed as Lord Scott, a law lord, says "the definition of xenophobia would almost certainly cover the distribution of Biggles and probably the Old Testament".

CIB Vice Chairman, Lord Pearson said "One of the most sinister and little-known aspects of our relationship with the EU is that when the executive agrees something on Britain's behalf, parliament is powerless to change it. If we voted against the warrant it would be enforced by the European Court. This is a very important example of our subservience to Brussels. Parliament is irrelevant in the law-making process.

A Home Office spokesman said parliamentary scrutiny committees had already discussed the subject but Lord Pearson called these debates a "sham" because even though few who spoke in them agreed with the measure, parliament was unable to change it.

Those who have done this are either incompetent fools who "know not what they do" or malign knaves who have deliberately evaded parliament in order to push through a measure which will transfer even more power to the dictators of Brussels. They have betrayed British democracy and are a disgrace to this nation. Those who support the use of the European arrest warrant in this country are at the very least Lenin's "useful idiots" or, more likely, arrogant pseudo fascists who seek supreme power for their elite club at the expense of the democratic rights of the people. Unless the British wake up soon it really will be too late.

25/06/2002

To an innocent observer the events of the last few weeks seem to indicate that the British are as far as ever from embracing the idea of a single European state. The good natured crowds in the Mall celebrating the Queen's Golden Jubilee, and the delight with which the efforts of the English football team have been received show that a benign patriotism, not a malign nationalism, is very much alive in the hearts of the people.

And yet...

Even as the ambitions of the Eurocrats seem more remote than ever from normal life in Britain they are scheming to gain more power for themselves. As the latest issue of The Democrat, produced by the Campain Against Euro Federalism, reveals, Romano Prodi is seeking:

• the end of all vetos and opt-outs, including that of Britain from the ERM

• a single EU foreign policy. EU foreign policy tsar Javier Solana to be absorbed into the Commission and his role merged with that of external affairs eurocrat Chris Patten

• a single EU constitution for an expanded EU

• a single asylum and immigration policy

• the Commission to have power over national budgets, only to be overturned by unanimous vote

• the Commission to represent the eurozone on the world stage, such as the World bank and the IMF

Can there ever have been such an open display of arrogance and ambition from an unelected official before!

In his masterpiece 1984 George Orwell forsaw how the mass of the people, the proletariat, could be distracted from reality by what he called prolefeed, consisting of, inter alia, a national lottery and moronic entertainment. It is doubly ironic that one example of the latter now is derived from a concept within Orwell's own book, and that so many people waste their energies discussing that disgrace to broadcasting Big Brother, instead of recognizing that their own politicians are in the process of handing them over to an undemocratic regime centred in Brussels.

There is no reason why the British people should not enjoy national celebrations, and be pleased by a successful football team, but, no matter how much the direction in which the EU is travelling is opposed to their wishes, they will be forced to go down that path unless they wake up to the manner in which their country is being destroyed by stealth.

16/06/2002

The meeting held in Horley was very successful and the audience enjoyed a number of outstanding speeches from Sir Oliver Wright, former British ambassador to the USA, Sir Richard Body and Lord Stoddart. A tape of the proceedings will shortly be available but several of the main points raised by the speakers are detailed below:

• Sir Oliver related that, when Heath was telling the House of Commons that his government was negotiating for the best possible deal for Britain, in reality he had sent a message to those involved that they should "Swallow everything, and swallow it now". This set the course by which the British people have constantly been deceived as to the truth of what is happening.

• Sir Richard told how, in his younger days when he truly believed in the European project, he had been at a meeting in Brussels when of the officials are said to him in an unguarded moment "Of course it is all about power. The European Union will become the most powerful organisation in the world and we (meaning the political class of Europe) will control it". For Sir Richard, who is a democrat to his fingertips, this was his road to Damascus, and he has fought these pseudo fascists ever since

• Lord Stoddart revealed that, in a conversation with some German politicians he had asked them why, given that a majority of Germans opposed giving up the mark, Germany would nevertheless join the Euro. The answer he received was "that the decisions in Germany were for the political class, not the people".

The common thread running through all these anecdotes is that the European elites have only contempt for democracy. In France it is the graduates of the 'grand ecoles' who rule, in Germany it is the political class. We in Britain stand on the brink of surrendering the democracy which we have taken centuries to build and which we shall never retrieve once it has been destroyed. As Lord Stoddart pointed out, the European arrest warrant, shortly to come before Parliament, will allow the dictators of Brussels to silence as those who oppose them, while Daniel Hannan, from his position as an MEP, warned that proposed legislation will outlaw all political parties except those who accept the claims of the European Union to reign supreme. We have been warned

09/06/2002

The CIB has responded to the appeal by the Government of Gibraltar and below are the two letters involved, the first to the Chief Minister of Gibraltar, and the second to Jack Straw:

To: The Honourable Peter Caruana, Chief Minister, Government of Gibraltar

7 June 2002

Dear Mr. Caruana,

At its Annual General Meeting this Campaign passed a resolution criticising the British Government about its negotiations with Spain concerning Gibraltar. It was subsequently decided that we would write a letter to Mr. Jack Straw expressing our views and I have pleasure in enclosing a copy of that letter.

I trust that you may be encouraged by this expression of support for the people of Gibraltar from a political organisation in the United Kingdom. I think that it expresses the views of a large number of people in the United Kingdom.

With best wishes,

Yours sincerely,

Sir Robin Williams, Hon. Secretary

To: The Rt. Hon. Jack Straw, MP, Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office

7 June 2002

The Campaign for an Independent Britain, at their Annual General Meeting in April, passed a resolution condemning the Government for their negotiations with the Spanish Government over the future sovereignty of Gibraltar. The very holding of such negotiations without the consent of the people of Gibraltar was considered to be a betrayal of them and showed contempt for their loyalty to Britain over a considerable period of time.

The Gibraltarians do not relish and, indeed, fear a future where Spain has either full or partial sovereignty over them and the threatening and spiteful behaviour of the Spanish Government towards the people of The Rock in recent years has served to confirm and exacerbate their fears. After all, Spain is still bound by international treaty over the sovereignty of Gibraltar and they should not be allowed to escape their responsibility under the Treaty of Utrecht. Furthermore, it is not so long ago that Spain was under the yoke of fascism and there is no certainty yet that they will not revert to that form of government.

CIB, therefore, trusts that you will show proper consideration and respect for the wishes of the people of Gibraltar and will not sacrifice their desires and long term interests to the whim of some perceived superior interest emanating from the Foreign Office or Downing Street or both. We believe that Britain should now withdraw from any further negotiations with Spain over the sovereignty of the Territory and, if the people of Gibraltar request it, consideration should be given to the incorporation of Gibraltar into the United Kingdom.

Sir Robin Williams, Hon. Secretary

09/06/2002

Once again that truly embarrassing program, the Eurovision Song Contest, is polluting our screens, the only entertainment, between the dreadful songs, and the false bonhomie, being the cynical commentary by Terry Wogan. It is only worth mentioning in that the voting always reveals the true opinion these nations have of each other, disregarding which effort was the least worse, preferring to support those who most closely share their particular values, whether it be Austria and Germany, Spain and Portugal, or any other similar chums. Of course there is nothing surprising, or wrong, about this as it is only natural that one should feel an affinity for those with whom one has most in common. The lesson for the European Union is that they have no chance of forming a 'European' identity from such disparate nations, and for the British that those to whom they are closest are not across the Channel, but across the oceans.

25/05/2002

That great unelected, otherwise known as European Commissioner Chris Patten, is once again proving just where his loyalties lie. This time he has been writing in the Spectator, giving us his gracious advice as to how the British people can get over their resentment at the European Union's increasing control over minute details of Britain's economy and daily life. His great plan is that they dissolve themselves as British and reinvent themselves as Europeans.

He seems to have recognized, as constantly pointed out by Eurorealists, that a single European state will never be brought under anything like democratic scrutiny and accountability unless and until its inhabitants come to see themselves as citizens of Europe, rather than of their constituent nations. However, he fails to see that this is an impossible task, certainly not achievable in anything less than centuries, but instead says that the emotional reinvention of the British people is the key to this process: "A healthy European democracy will develop only when people begin to feel an emotional commitment to their European identity," is the way he puts it. As is case with all of a dictatorial disposition Patten tries to stir up enmity with others as a means of creating some sort of common feeling within the entity he is seeking to create. In this case, in common with his friends in France and Germany he wants to make Europeans resentful of the United States. "Shared indignation at U.S. steel protectionism" is to him a hopeful sign, like the first robin of spring.

As the British are not as given to envy and schadenfruede as are some of their neighbours, this plan may not be sufficient to generate the required Euro-emotions. Another part of the program is the promotion of regional loyalties, which are already quite strong in parts of Europe. Some maps published by the European Union no longer show the national boundaries, but instead show Europe only as a mosaic of regional boundaries: Bavaria, Catalonia, and Provence.

In Britain, the government has just proposed doing its bit to make Britain just another part of the Euro-mosaic. It has offered a scheme to divide England up into a handful of regions, each with their own assembly, which would have not quite as much power as an American county council. As these regions came into being, the system of counties, over a thousand years old, would be abolished.

While Mr Blair fiddles with English local identity, and Patten plays the anti-American card to build his Euro-nationalism, the underlying sense of common identity of the English speaking world just, as Churchill said, keeps rolling along, just like the Mississippi. The basis for a real and free collaboration of those nations enjoying "a good difference," "common language," and "shared values" already exists. Solidarity inward, rather than resentment outward, is the true basis of co-operation. Patten and Blair are advocating union with those with whom we have very little in common while there is a whole world of nations out there who are our natural allies.

25/05/2002

There was further evidence of the decline in support for the euro since the start of the year in an NOP poll this week for Channel 4's Powerhouse.

The poll showed that 39 per cent would vote to join if a referendum were held now, but 61 per cent would vote against. In January the same question put support for the single currency at 42 per cent, with 52 per cent against. This is a 12 point increase in the 'no' lead since January. That Europhile rag The Mirror decided not to put the poll on the front page this time!

Also this week a new ICM poll showed 29 percent would vote to join while 56 percent would vote not to join. The ICM poll, unlike the NOP poll, asks a completely straightforward "referendum-style" question, with just two choices. The NOP poll gives people 4 choices. A rule of thumb in polling is that, broadly speaking, the more choices on offer, the closer the result of any sort of poll is to 50-50.

Unsurprisingly, the people who spent the last three years saying that public opinion was going to shift decisively in favour of the euro after notes and coins are now saying this effect will only turn up after the summer. This is an interesting change of story from the euro lobby. Back in October Simon Buckby, the charmless individual who 'leads' Britain in Europe, was claiming that the launch of notes and coins would have a "huge impact" on public opinion.

Of course we Eurorealists would not change our principled position on the Euro, even if a large majority of our fellow countrymen disagreed, but it somewhat reassuring that so far the lies and distortions coming from the Europhiles have had precisely no impact, unless it be to harden opinion against the proposal.

25/05/2002

The eurorealists' favourite Euromaniac Romano Prodi will keep embarrassing those who want the single European state to be created by stealth in that he insists on revealing the truth about the intentions of those running the project. His latest proposals are a case in point.

The Commission wants the EU to achieve almost complete powers on the foreign and security policy and on the co-ordination of economic policy. Also, the Commission wants the function of high representative for foreign policy, currently in the Council's hands, to be moved to the Commission, which should then have the right to initiate and conduct the foreign policy, and represent the Union externally.

Members of the European Parliament did not hesitate to preach a holly alliance with the Commission in the reforms battle to achieve more powers for the Commission, instead of the Council, as this would indirectly strengthen the Parliament, which controls the Commission, but has no powers over the Council. The launch of the Commission's proposal triggered the birth of a unholy alliance between the two institutions, both of which would gain from enhancing the community method.

Prodi was quite open about his grab for enhanced power when he presented the proposal to the European Parliament on Wednesday. We take the risk of provoking. It is less serious than that of being marginalized. After all, I am almost sure the Convention is going to propose something which will not be very different from what we propose

The leader of the European Socialists in the European Parliament, Enrique Baron Crespo. told Prodi We are your allies in this battle while Green leader Monica Frassoni told Mr Prodi The battle between the two visions of Europe hides a battle between a federal and an intergovernmental model, and a more pragmatic fight for who holds the power: Brussels or the national capitals.

For the British this love affair between Prodi and the federalist lapdogs of the European Parliament should be a clear warning that the only way to retain democratic control over our foreign policy, our domestic taxation and, ultimately, over our lives, is to leave the pseudo fascists of Continental Europe to their Commission, Council, Convention and all the other bodies they use to conceal their malign intentions, and to withdraw from the European Union without further delay.

25/05/2002

During the past week we have been treated to three interviews of Mr Blair on Newsnight. In the course of the first he told us how successful Britain now was, that our economy was outperforming almost every other in the world, that our unemployment rates were low, that our inflation rate was low, that our interest rates were low, that the exchange rate was stable, that manufacturing output was rising.

Mr Blair was right - things are not perfect but they are going well and the British have reasons to feel pretty happy about the economy.

However, in the second interview, this same man told us that his burning ambition was to sign Britain up to the single currency, a doomed project which is currently undermining the economies of those foolish enough to have joined. This provokes some questions:

Firstly, the famous, and specious, five tests should be extended to include the following:

• Why should we, with low, and reducing, levels of unemployment, join a project with high, and rising, levels of unemployment?

• Why should we, with a low, and falling, inflation rate, join a project with a high, and rising, inflation rate?

• Why should we, with stable interest rates tailored to our position on the economic cycle, join a project with a level of interest rates set by those attempting the impossible task of satisfying twelve disparate economies with one rate?

• Why should we, with a stable exchange rate, join a currency which has proved to be both volatile and weak?

• Is Mr Blair weak in the head?

The answer to the last of these questions provokes a second major question. Clearly Mr Blair, whatever else he is, is not lacking in intelligence, so why does he, together with all the other Europhiles, choose to ignore the economic realities and constantly push for the UK to join the Euro. It is the answer to this which is most depressing of all.

These people may, or may not understand economics, but in reality they just don't care. They are obsessed with their political ambition to build a single European state, a rival to the United States of America, dominated by their political class, which will allow them, as individuals, to be the world stars of this new creation. Already we hear of the idea that Mr Blair might become an elected President of Europe.

That brings us to the final question. Are the British people mad enough, or apathetic enough, to stand by and see all this come to pass? If they do nothing, if they allow themselves to be tricked into voting to join the single currency then, in years to come, as their economic prosperity becomes a distant dream, as the reality of the police state created by the implementation of Corpus Juris stifles opposition and as bureaucratic dictatorship replaces democracy, they will have plenty of time for vain regrets about that they will have lost.

18/05/2002

In an article for The Times Kenneth Clark shows his usual cavalier disregard for the facts and illustrates that he has forgotten nothing, nor learnt anything, from history. The launch of the Euro, which he praises so mightily, has so far been nothing more than a logistics exercise, proving that developed industrial countries can distribute notes and coins without dropping them on their foot. The true tests will come when individual nations find that they are forbidden by the European Central Bank from adjusting their fiscal policies to counter adverse economic developments, or electorates discover that they are unable to influence the financial policies of their governments via the ballot box.

Clarke also raises the matter of inward investment, ignoring the fact that more flows to the UK from outside the EU than to the whole of Euroland put together.

Clarke refuses to recognize that the most significant reason for the decline in the fortunes of the Conservative party is that, due to the malign influence of its Heathite wing, it signally failed even to conserve the independence of this country, being instrumental in transferring massive powers to Brussels. It is this betrayal of its core supporters which has damaged the Conservatives, quite possibly beyond repair. Clarke should look to the beam in his own eye before attacking Eurorealists inside his party

17/05/2002

At a recent degree ceremony in Torquay the audience was asked to stand, not for the playing of God Save the Queen, but for the anthem of the European Union.

Although the Open University has now conceded defeat in the face of indignant protests and abandoned this particular piece of treason it is almost beyond belief that an official truly believed that the national anthem of our nation should be replaced by this hymn to a bureaucratic dictatorship. It illustrates how many people, unknown to the general public, are involved in the fifth column intent on destroying this nation in the interests of the European elite.

That this elite is arrogant beyond words is shown by a story related by John Humphrys in today's Sunday Times. He relates the tale of a conversation with a young man working in the commission in Brussels at the time when the Danes said no to the euro. Rather than he and his colleagues feeling depressed, dismayed or defeated they were instead outraged and thoroughly indignant. One of them actually said "These issues are too important to be left to truck drivers and women to be decided".

We have been warned - these people would not be out of place in any of the totalitarian dictatorships of the twentieth century and if we yield our democracy to them it will cease to exist.

12/05/2002

A number of celebrities who are known as supporters of New Labour have joined some Labour MPs in the production of a video opposed to the abandoning of the pound in favour of the Euro. Those taking part are Harry Enfield, Rik Mayall, Vic Reeves, Jools Holland, Phil Cornwall, Diane Abbott and Kate Hoey. In addition the Sun reports that other well known personalities are likely to join the fight, these including Mick Jagger, Carol Vorderman, George Best, Ian Botham and Barbara Windsor.

Although the views of celebrities are no more important than those of anyone else, in the current cultural climate their support will carry greater weight than many such as economists and politicians, and the Eurorealist cause should welcome their support.

12/05/2002

An article in yesterday's Sunday Times reports how Gordon Brown is calling upon the European Commission to withdraw its objections to his budget plans. At a time when the British Chancellor has made clear that the government's first priority is to improve public services the EU is insisting that he instead obeys the rules of the so called stability and growth pact. In order to obey the dictators of Brussels the British government would have to cut spending plans, or increase taxes, or both, to the tune of £11 billion.

It may be that the EU will kindly grant the Chancellor their permission, as even these arrogant bureaucrats know that to do otherwise would certainly doom any chance of the British people voting yes in a referendum on joining the single currency. However, the fact that they think they have the right to dictate our budget, even when we have not joined their beloved Euro, should be a warning to the people of Britain that, if we were mad enough to join, we could wave goodbye to the right to determine our own budgets in future.

Those misguided people who think that opposition to the EU comes only from the right of politics should ask the socialist left just what they think of spending cuts imposed by Brussels. It might open their eyes as to the real cross party nature of the Eurorealist movement.

06/05/2002

This week we have heard comments from a number of those who advocate a federal Europe which reveal much of the reality behind all the Europhile propaganda. One is obviously a result of a politician facing election, and attempting to placate a suspicious electorate, but the rest show just how arrogant, and in one case at least, evil, are the proponents of the European Union.

Firstly, the German Chancellor, Gerhard Schroeder, has warned the European Commission that support for far-right groups could grow if it pushes changes too fast. During a meeting in Brussels with senior EU commissioners, Mr Schroeder said the success of the far-right National Front candidate in the French elections, Jean-Marie Le Pen, was a backlash against European integration. "There is a swing towards a return to national policies, xenophobia, the rejection of tolerance and openness. As Europeans, we have to be careful because the tempo of change is so fast that the capacity of citizens to absorb it often doesn't keep pace. The discussions are taking place against the alarming background of 20 per cent of French people voting for an anti-European.

He also said some of the European Commission's policies were harming German industry and could increase unemployment in Germany and urged the Commission to engage member governments in dialogue before taking sensitive decisions that affected people's living standards.

These comments by Mr Schroeder are clearly a result of his fear that the German people are sick of the EU and that, as a consequence, he may lose power to a slightly more Eurosceptic opposition. It is worth pointing out however that, loathsome as Mr Le Pen's racist views are, to be against the EU is to oppose a bureaucratic creation of the political class and is not the same thing as being 'Anti European', which implies a dislike of the citizens of other European nations. Mr Le Pen may feel that way but it is not the view of the mainstream opposition to the EU.

As one might expect Mr Schroeder's daring complaints met with the usual arrogance from the European Commission, Romano Prodi, replying that all the reforms proposed by the Commission were agreed by EU leaders in Lisbon in March 2000 and his spokesman, Jonathan Faull, said that in the formulation of policy the Commission would "no doubt give heightened attention to some of the things he (Schroeder) raised". Mr Schroeder can whistle for any help from that quarter.

Prodi showed all his usual arrogance when he spoke to the Said Business school in Oxford on 29 April when he attacked Britain's relationship with the United States of America and again demanded that we join his beloved single currency. However, as is the case with Mr Prodi, he is a good friend of the Eurorealist cause in that he will persist in telling it as it is, much to the chagrin of those in Britain who wish to achieve their objectives by stealth. He stated "Britain has failed to appreciate that the reality of European integration is that the Union is much more than a single market. The EU was never divorced from politics. Bringing in the single market took more than majority voting. It meant pooling national sovereignty"

We must thank Mr Prodi for once again stating the truth. The EU is a political construct, not an economic arrangement, and to stay in means the end of the UK as an independent entity.

One of those members of the British political class who will be least likely to welcome Mr Prodi's honesty is that perennially unelected holder of major positions, Chris Patten. This man, held in great esteem by those who think Edward Heath was a great Prime Minister, instead of the one whom only Neville Chamberlain could compete with for the title of the worst, has spent his career patronising the British people, whom he clearly holds in great contempt. In a speech on 30 April he described British equivocation on Europe as "shameful", and said that the debate on the Euro was being conducted in "a wretched way".

In other words if we decline to support his beloved European Union, which gives him and his elitist friends the ability to lord it over us without the need to bother with elections, then we are shameful and wretched. Well Patten is arrogant and self satisfied and we must hope he never returns to British politics.

In the Times on 1 May an article appeared by Lord Sainsbury headed How the EU is putting itself out of business, with a subheading "The agenda pursued by Romano Prodi will undermine the prosperity of Europe. It is not necessary to repeat the whole of the article here as the main thrust can be obtained from the opening and closing sentences: "Business has been the largest part of my life. Only once did I become momentarily immersed in politics and that was in 1975 when I served as Treasurer of Britain in Europe in the historic referendum campaign. I was an enthusiastic European at that time but I have become increasingly disillusioned as the European ideal in which I so strongly believed has become distorted"..."There is an even wider issue at stake. The whole relationship between the governing elites and the ordinary people. Just as the lifeblood of a democracy is the involvement and consent of the electorate, so the lifeblood of an economy is the involvement and consent of all in business, especially small business. In both cases the risks of alienation today are all too evident. and not just in France".

It is very nice of Lord Sainsbury to admit that he was wrong and we were right all those years ago but if this proves anything it is that the electorate should ignore the pronouncements of businessmen on a matter which affects the future of democracy, as they think in terms of profit, not of the rights of the people.

The most sinister contribution to this week's quotes came from an interview that the BBC chose to conduct with one of the infamous Mitford sisters, the widow of Oswald Mosely. She made clear her moral position in describing Adolf Hitler, that mass murdering thug, as a great man and then let the cat out of the bag by praising the federalist aims of the European Union. Precisely! Mosely was a lifelong advocate of the idea of a single European state and the first significant support for a single currency came from Josef Goebbels. Those who today are enthusiasts for the European project are the true heirs of these fascists and when one hears the far right pretend to be opposed to the EU it is because of electoral considerations, not conviction. Given the chance they would welcome a united Europe, provided it was dominated by those who think like them. The true democratic opposition to the EU is from those who place a belief in the rights of the people above the interests of the political class. When Europhiles attack us with lies about being motivated by xenophobia we should remind them that they stand four square with Mosely and Goebbels and perhaps they should examine the beam in their own eye.

Finally it is worth noting that that popularist heroine Mo Mowlem chose to advocate joining the single currency as a means of spiting the USA. This merely goes to show that, despite her differences with the rest of the Blairites, she is a paid up member of that middle class, elitist group, which is instinctively anti American, believes in the virtues of an EU which only exists in their own imagination and puts the interests of the political elite first. She showed great fortitude in overcoming personal illness but that does not make her right on the issue of Europe, or indeed on any other issue.

None of the people quoted above are Eurorealists but their pronouncements prove once again the old adage about being condemned out of their own mouths. With people like this on their side the Europhiles really are in trouble.

05/05/2002

This morning the BBC provided yet another example of its poodle like devotion to the European Union when the Today business correspondent interviewed the chairman of the Bundesbank. The latter gentleman had given us the benefit of his wisdom by declaring that we needed Euroland more than they needed us and that consequently we should join the single currency without delay although, if this statement were true, why is it that those most keen for the UK to join, apart from our own fifth column, are those already in. Could it possibly be that misery loves company?

The searching interview consisted of questions on the lines of "It's all going well isn't it?" and "Once British tourists use the Euro notes and coins this summer on holiday they will support joining, won't they?". This line of enquiry would be what one might expect from Geoffrey Howe, or other totally committed federalists, but is hardly what an independent broadcaster should follow. Even when the interviewer daringly raised the subject of the problems of setting one interest rate for twelve different economies he then tamely accepted the ridiculous reply that the ECB's freedom from the need to be accountable to electorates made their decisions correct. Perhaps only a German, or a committed federalist, would be happy to proclaim a lack of democratic accountability as a virtue.

At no time do these guardians of the truth point out that the British economy has a vastly different cycle to those of the Continent, that the level of owner occupation in Britain makes our population much more vulnerable to adverse interest rates than the flat dwellers of Paris and Berlin, or that we trade much more with the rest of the world than does Euroland.

The idea that, because a number of advanced industrialised countries managed to distribute a new set of notes and coins without dropping them on their foot, somehow proves the success of the single currency is laughable. When Euroland experiences its first real test, whether it be a Le Pen victory in France (unlikely) or budget problems in Italy or Portugal (almost certainly) then we shall see the reality and be glad that we had the good sense not to touch the Euro with a bargepole.

30/04/2002

The fate of the British plane spotters in Greece should serve as a final warning to this country that to accept the implementation of the European Arrest Warrant will drive one of the last nails into the coffin of our freedom. If the latter is passed by Parliament then, in future, a local magistrate in Greece, or any other EU member state, will be able to order that a British subject is to be dragged from their own home, without let or hindrance by any British authority, and incarcerated in a foreign jail for an indeterminate period of time, to face charges on crimes which no British court has ever deemed to be such. When one sees the lack of comprehension displayed by the Greeks over the plane spotting case it is obvious that, even with no malign intent, serious mistakes can occur. How much more likely would it be that the deliberate desire of the federalists to silence their opponents will cause trumped up charges in obscure courts to be used to persecute Eurorealists.

The sacrifice, by the political class, of British freedom, in order that they might enjoy the personal benefits of membership of the European elite, is yet another sign that these people will stop at nothing in their pursuit of self interest.

30/04/2002

Opponents of the European Union have warned time and again that the arrogance of Europe's politicians in believing that they could safely ignore the views of their electorates while building a single European state would result in a rise in extremism.

Yesterday's success by Le Pen in France, plus increasing support for the hard right across Europe vindicates these warnings, and exposes the hollowness of the claims that the European Union enhances democracy and guarantees peace on the Continent.

The UK must withdraw from the organisation before we find ourselves locked into a fascist dominated European empire, or suffer grievous damage as the whole rotten edifice crashes around the ears of the elites. In the meantime we must pray that the spirit of Pierre Laval is not once more abroad.

Those in thrall to Brussels will no doubt claim, as they always do, that the answer to the problem is "more Europe, not less". One wonders whether people like this are clinically sane. The destruction wrought by the undemocratic monster of the EU can only be halted by destroying the monster itself.

22/04/2002

Regular listeners to the Saturday essay on Radio 4 will be aware that Will Self, that voice of the sneering classes, alternates with Frederick Forsyth, principled Eurorealist and intellectual scourge of the Europhiles. Now however comes the news that the BBC is to drop Frederick Forsyth because, as stated in the Sunday Times today, "some senior executives do not like his views".

Once again the BBC proves how far it has travelled since the days it spoke for Britain during the Second World War. It is now dominated by those who are only happy at the dining tables of North London pseudo intellectuals, where they can sneer at everything decent about this country, deprecate the views of the ordinary British people, connive at the suppression of free speech, and yet, by the process of doublethink of which Orwell warned, can believe themselves to be fine, upstanding liberal minded individuals.

Everyone who still cares anything about the freedoms we once enjoyed in this country should write to the BBC, to their MPs and to the media to protest at the removal of Frederick Forsyth, at the behest of those who cannot abide the open expression of opposition to their views.

In all the discussions of whether or not the electorate will be content to pay increased National Insurance in order to gain an improved NHS the usual silence is maintained on the scandal of taxpayer's money disappearing into the bottomless pit of Brussels. While the Chancellor talks of changes involving an extra seven or eight billion pounds every year neither he, nor media commentators, speak of the eleven billion per annum which is the gross amount paid by the UK to the EU. That we receive about sixty per cent back in EU grants is irrelevant as these payments go to projects chosen by Brussels, not Westminster and require matching amounts to be found from British sources.

In the main the British people do not resent paying taxes for public services but, were they aware of the truth, they would strenuously object to seeing so much paid in order that the political class may be members of the European club. How many hospitals, schools, railways or roads could be purchased by using our own money for our own purposes and not sending it to Mr Prodi and his crew.

It is the failure to address this subject which makes the budget, along with all those put forward by British politicians beholden to Brussels, a fraud and a disgrace.

18/04/2002

The following report is based on the author's personal impressions of the meeting. For a full recording of the precise words used it is recommended that our Press Officer Stuart Gulleford be approached for a recording of the proceedings.

The public meeting was well attended and was treated to some excellent speeches. Lord Stoddart began proceedings by assessing the current situation, pointing out that the absorption of the UK into a single European state was continuing apace and that the Britain we have known for generations is on the point of expiration. The introduction of the European arrest warrant will make it possible for a British subject to be arrested in his own home, without any extradition proceedings or judicial intervention, and taken to a jail anywhere in the European Union, where he or she could be held, without benefit of habeas corpus, for an indeterminate time, before being tried for something which is not even a crime in the UK. It is not too difficult to see that this could be used to silence all those in CIB, UKIP, the Democracy Movement etc., who dare to oppose the dictators of Brussels. Every British politician who has consented, actively or passively to this, has betrayed the democracy into which he was born, and made it possible for a Continental wide police state to be established. Those who claim that this is a paranoid fantasy should remember what has happened over Corpus Juris. When we warned that it would become the legal system for the EU we were told we were mad. Now however that is just what is occurring.

Lord Stoddart felt that there were a few bright spots, not least a change of heart among Labour supporters, and on that note he handed over to the secretary of the Labour Euro Safeguards Campaign, John Mills.

John agreed that things were indeed black and began by rehearsing the reasons why, quite apart from political considerations, the single currency would be a disaster for Britain. He then enumerated many of the political arguments why the EU was distorting, indeed destroying this country's political system. Nevertheless he also felt that there were reasons for optimism as far as opinion on the left was concerned. Despite enduring a decade and a half of Europhiliac leadership, polls within the Labour party showed that opposition to the EU remained as strong as it was at the time of the 1975 referendum, while the creation of Labour Against the Euro (see item below) and an increasing awareness among trade unions that the EU was not going to be nirvana for the working class, meant that the potential for reversing the current stance of the party should not be ignored.

Lord Stoddart then introduced the main speaker, Lord Tebbit, pointing out that this was a red letter day for CIB as, after declining invitations for twenty years, Lord Tebbit had finally agreed to address one of our meetings.

Lord Tebbit gave a long, and in many places deeply disturbing speech, as he surveyed the current scene and the likely developments over the next few years. He pointed out that the question 'Who Governs Britain' would have had no meaning until we joined the EU as the answer, arrived at after centuries of political evolution, was 'You, the people'. Now however we have lost control of our farming industry, as evidenced by Brussels, not Westminster, directing the foot and mouth campaign in the interests of the Continent, not these islands; of our fishing grounds as the betrayal by the Heath government in signing the hastily cobbled together Common Fisheries Policy destroys our fleets, hands our resources to nations such as Spain and forces us to import fish from the other side of the world; of our armed forces as the European Army is developed; of our legal system as the Napoleonic code of Corpus Juris replaces the Common Law; our of police as Europol bids to become a EU wide force and of our laws as directives drawn up by Brussels bureaucrats pass into our law without let or hindrance by our own elected politicians. The single currency was merely the last brick in the edifice which would see the single European state, bureaucratic not democratic, ruled by elites not the people, become the new European empire.

Lord Tebbit related how, at a meeting he held last year with thirty five German businessmen and two German bankers he decided to ask how many wished to see Germany join the single currency. The answer was one banker, all the rest being opposed. Not surprisingly he then asked them why they were not campaigning against the Euro and was told "You don't understand. The political class have decided on this and no on else will be permitted to interfere". It is this domination by an arrogant elite which the Continentals accept, but which is so alien to Britain, which the EU will impose everywhere if we are so foolish as to join the single currency.

He warned that there is a new class of stateless people, composed of captains of multi national industries, of celebrities, of pan national politicians, who wielded enormous influence and who possessed no true loyalty to any nation. Some of these people did not actively support the replacement of the nation state by supra national organisations but those that did were in a position to cause immense damage to the fight for freedom.

Lord Tebbit believed that, as the truth dawns on the peoples of Europe, but particularly upon those of the UK, who have always been fierce in their belief in their right to govern themselves, so the risk of a violent reaction to the suppression of their democracy will grow. We might yet see the British forced to fight for their freedom from these Continental dictators.

Lord Tebbit said much more in this vein but his ultimate conclusion was chilling. Not by conquest, by guns and tanks, but by stealth, deliberate deception and with the assistance of a culpable apathy, the people of this country has seen its governance transferred to a foreign power. If we do not awaken and turn back before it is too late then we are truly intellectually dead.

The warning issued by these principled and intelligent men must be heeded. Unless the people raise their eyes from the insignificance of the affairs of celebrities, the results of ultimately unimportant sporting events and the farce which passes for political debate in this country then they will lose it all. They will go gentle into that dark night and all the struggles of the centuries, the World Wars and the sacrifices made by generations will have been for nothing. The UK will be a province of a Europe wide dictatorship, or rather, as intended by the EU, twelve administrative areas out of one hundred, the name of England passing into history. How Hitler would laugh.

14/04/2002

The obvious comment would be 'better late than never' but in truth the creation of a group of Labour parliamentarians opposed to the single currency is a very positive step, which should be welcomed by all Eurorealists. They have put their heads above the parapet, defying the control freaks of 'New Labour' on a matter of principle, and are therefore the heirs to a proud tradition which it had seemed was dying out in politics.

Last Wednesday one of the members of LATE, John Cryer, MP for Hornchurch, took part in a debate against Sir Anthony Meyer, and, if Mr Cryer is representative of this new group, showed that we have much to hope for from them. He cut right to the quick of the argument, pointing out that the Euro was not an economic issue, but a political one, and that at its heart was the question of democracy for, if the people cannot dismiss those who are in charge of the economy then accountability, and therefore democracy, is effectively dead.

Mr Cryer did not limit himself to the Euro but made clear his opposition to so much that has been forced upon this country by the European Union. Although one swallow does not make a summer we must hope that at last the true Labour party is beginning to reassert itself and that eventually they will return to the position taken until the late 1980s, of opposition to UK membership of the EU. The Chairman of CIB Lord Stoddart is fond of recounting how he opposed the Single European Act in the House of Lords as official spokesman for the Labour Party. The man most responsible for the reversal of policy was of course the Welsh windbag, Neil Kinnock, and now he is one of those commissioners who dare to claim the right to rule the British people, who had twice rejected him at the ballot box. Unlike the Prime Minister Mr Kinnock cannot be removed from office by any democratic vote - that is the dreadful reality of the EU.

14/04/2002

The Conservative MEP, and convinced Eurorealist, Daniel Hannan, has written a perceptive article about the effects of European attitudes to corruption upon the British body politic. Of course, as a Conservative, he is partisan in his assessment of blame, but, viewed as an assessment of how we are once again suffering from membership of the EU, it is a stark warning:

At the height of the Hinduja row, Tony Blair made a throwaway remark to the effect that we ought to keep things in proportion, and that Britain's political system was still one of the cleanest in the world. At the time, I was disposed to believe him. It irked me that he appeared to have reached this view only after doing so much to stir up the country over sleaze in the early 1990s. But, through gritted teeth, I had to acknowledge that he was probably right.

Now I am less sure. The Byers and Mittal scandals have a different timbre to them, a quality that is can only be described as un-British. By that, I do not mean that they involve unusually bad behaviour: British politicians, as individuals, are no more or less venal than any others. But there is something alien in the Government's "collective" response: the closing of ranks, the intolerance of criticism, the sense that we should be grateful for what we have, and not be distracted from Labour's mighty achievements. It seems we are finally learning to be good Europeans.

Cast your mind back to the sleaze scandals that engulfed those Euro-titans, Helmut Kohl, Francois Mitterand and Giulio Andreotti. When it emerged that they had been advancing their aims through illicit donations and hidden slush funds, the European political class leapt to their defence. These men, we were told, were the patriarchs of modern Euro-federalism, the fathers of Maastricht. Next to that achievement, who cared about suitcases full of banknotes? In any case, it was not as though they had enriched themselves personally; they did it for Europe.

New Labour, too, seems to govern on the basis that the end justifies the means. To its supporters, what matters most is the Project -- that is, the transformation into Britain into what Tony Blair likes to call "a modern European country". Since the Project is held to be self-evidently good, almost any compromise can be justified in its pursuit. If a businessman supports the Project financially, he is to be trusted and favoured. If a civil servant stands in its way, he is to be sacked. And where did Labour strategists learn to think this way? Why, in their favourite city, Brussels.

I can already hear the sharp intake of Euro-phile breaths. I mean, really, these sceptics. Is there anything wrong in the world that they won't try to pin on the EU? Are they really claiming that Brussels is making our own politicians misbehave?

Yes. Or, at least, I am. After three years in the European Parliament, I can no longer avoid the conclusion that the political culture of Brussels is seeping into the veins of our own body politic. For the EU is not just an international association; it is also a habit of mind. It rests on certain beliefs: that some matters -- notably closer integration -- are too important to be left to the people; that unfettered democracy (or "populism") is dangerous; that politicians are set apart by their vocation from their constituents.

In such a climate, criticism of the system, even on grounds of financial impropriety, is frowned on. Every year, for example, the Court of Auditors refuses to endorse the EU budget, judging it to be riddled with fraud. Yet Euro-MPs never see this as a good enough reason to withhold money from the Commission. To them, the purity of the goal -- deeper union -- wipes away the stain of billions of stolen euros. To be overly concerned about such matters is to be seen, at best, as slightly anal, and, at worst, as malevolent.

I got a taste of this myself when, shortly after being elected to the Parliament, I wrote about some of the more extravagant allowances and expenses that are available to MEPs. The article was picked up by a German newspaper and, to this day, there are German MEPs who cut me when we pass in the corridor. One, with whom I had previously been on fairly friendly terms, sent me an email. "Dear Daniel Hannan", it read, "I can only assume that you were drunk before writing in this hostile way about a European institution". He did not dispute what I had written; his complaint was that such matters ought never to be aired outside the Parliament. He has not spoken to me since.

Our politicians would be less than human if they did not look longingly at what their continental counterparts are able to get away with. You can imagine the conversations that the Prime Minister must have with his opposite numbers. "Really, Tony, your British press is insufferable. In my country, no one would care if you helped out a party donor." Is it any wonder that Mr Blair is becoming so impatient with his domestic critics? After all, there he is, conducting important negotiations about the future of Europe, and all anyone in Britain wants to talk about is Ecclestone and Mittal and Byers and Vaz. Why, he must ask himself, can't we grow up and be more sophisticated, more continental?

Unfortunately, this is precisely what we are doing. And I don't just mean our politicians. Looking around my constituency, I have seen how the EU imposes its way of doing business on those who live most directly under its sway: farmers, fishermen, small traders. I have seen decent people being turned against their will into cheats. "The Common Fisheries Policy has made me a liar and a fraudster", a skipper once told me, anguish written all over his good, honest face. "If I didn't falsify my log, I couldn't stay inside the rules".

We like to believe that we take the law seriously. Go to any public meeting about Europe and, sooner or later, someone in the audience will stand up and complain that Britain is the only country that keeps the rules. Like many widespread beliefs, this used to be true, but no longer is. We currently come seventh out of fifteen in the implementation stakes. As EU regulations come to account for a higher and higher proportion of our legislation, we are assuming an increasingly dismissive attitude towards the law. The sad truth is that New Labour is getting its way: Britain is indeed becoming a modern European country. But, in Europeanising our institutions -- introducing PR, bringing in human rights codes, abolishing the hereditary peers and so on -- Labour is also Europeanising our attitude to politics and politicians. Perhaps this explains why we have reacted to the Byers and Mittal affairs with such impressively continental indifference.

Yet another reason for leaving the EU before it is too late!

07/04/2002

Eurorealists have warned time after time that the EU will threaten the arrangements the British have made for pensions provision. Here is an article which appeared in the Times Business News whch confirms this threat:

Britain fights European threat to pensions by Antonia Senior

Mr Rubenstein said: It is hard to understand why an effective and successful UK pensions model should be potentially destroyed by a directive which will have limited application to many other countries across Europe.

Isn't it amazing how we are always right and the Europhiles are always proved to be liars?

02/04/2002

Clearly one may find many sensible views on the European Union in the corridors of the London School of Economics. Not only is Dr Alan Sked, founder of UKIP, and one of the most vocal Eurorealists in the country, a Senior Lecturer in History there, but a letter in The Times from Professor Emeritus D. Cameron Watt shows that he is not alone among the academics in being on the side of the angels. It is worth quoting the Professor's letter in full, as it puts the intellectual case for rejecting the EU in an unarguable manner:

"It is pointless nonsense to debate whether Sir Winston Churchill's views of 1950 or 1962 have any relevance to the kind of federal Europe that is now contemplated. It is clear that that knowledgeable minority who opposed the British application to join the Common Market in 1962 were right in one vital respect.

Britain's political culture and bureaucratic system were irreconcilable with that of the European Common Market, and are still irreconcilable with that of the European Communities. Brussels presents us with a bureaucracy which is not responsible to anyone, incorporates a dictatorial system which dates from the era of Napoleon and is headed by commissioners who are themselves not formally responsible to any electorate.

The imperial bureaucracies of France and Germany were controlled by legal institutions such as the Conseil d'Etat in France. That of Brussels has no such check; nor does the central bank which manages the economy and the euro.

To say this is not to embrace the flag of the Little Englanders. It is to recognize that the issue today is not one of the promotion of European unity or of Britain's undoubted co-existence with Europe; but of promotion of the 'Europe' which now exists. Until Europe has a form of government that represents, is responsible to and can be removed from power by its peoples, those who love European culture, like our fellow Europeans and would wish to be able to work together with them have nowhere to go.

This 'Europe' is not our Europe. If it is not actually hostile to, it is certainly inimical to Britain's political cultures, and irreconcilable with our traditions of a civil service as the executant of the decisions of a representative government. And our diplomats should stop playing Neville Henderson to Brussel's Hitler."

Precisely. It is not about the flag, or xenophobia, or even the currency. It is about democracy.

01/04/2002

Europhiles must loathe Romano Prodi as he possesses the virtue of speaking the truth about the EU, revealing to all the true nature of the organisation. He has done it again by making comments on British policy in an interview with the New Statesman. He said , inter alia:

• On British policy towards the War on Terrorism "I don't like it. Do we want to shape a common policy or not?"

• On Gordon Brown's tests for the euro "If you were also to say that Britain will enter when each Briton can jump more than a metre in the air ... it's up to you"

• On British opt-outs on matters such as the Schengen agreement on border controls "You have to decide the matter, which way you're going to go. We need an active contribution on the UK side and we don't need this type of refusal of Europe. The opt-out can go on for a long period, but there cannot be a perpetual difference"

• On Britain not joining the euro "The consequences would be less damaging for Europe and more so for the UK. That would be your problem. But you cannot forbid us to make progress"

As President of the European Commission Mr Prodi is the true voice of the EU, arrogant, demanding, intolerant and determined that everyone should bend the knee to Brussels. We should be grateful that he makes all this clear, as it leaves the Europhiles with nowhere to hide when they seek to pretend that the UK benefits from membership of this vile organisation.

28/03/2002

In his usual excellent essay this morning on Radio 4 Frederick Forsythe exposed the lie that the European Union has been of economic benefit to the peoples of Europe. He gave details of a recent survey which showed that the gulf in economic prosperity between Europe and the USA is now at its greatest since the Second World War.

This statement may not mean much to those under forty but for those who can remember the post war years it will seem incredible. The USA emerged from the war untouched in her homeland, and with an economy which had been rescued from the depression years by war production. In contrast in 1947 Britain suffered the coldest winter for decades, there were enormous coal and power shortages, rationing was worse than during the war years and the Marshall plan was yet to save the economies of Europe.

Yet the difference in economic prosperity now is greater than then! What does this say about the benefits we are supposed to be gaining from being a member of the EU? It is not obvious that the bureaucratic monster run from Brussels does more to damage the economies of Europe than it does to create wealth.

Those who are happy to sacrifice our independence and democracy so that we may be a member of this vile organisation should be made to answer the simple question - What on earth do we gain by being a member? Of course the answer for the political elite is obvious - their noses are firmly in the trough. For the rest of us there are no benefits, only costs.

24/03/2002

The following is a report by the BBC on the fact that the Green Party has decided to join the Eurorealist campaign to oppose the Euro. While it is pleasing that people are waking up to the reality, the tone of this report shows both the ignorance and bias of the BBC, as the author is unaware, or is pretending to be unaware, that the Eurorealist cause has always embraced far more than the right wing of the Conservative party. One would not believe from this report that significant Labour figures such as the Lords Jay, Shore and Stoddart, plus Tony Benn, Denzil Davis and others have always opposed the European project, that Arthur Scargill's Socialist Labour Party and the Communist Party of Great Britain would leave the EU tomorrow, and that large numbers of ordinary trade unionists want nothing to do with Brussels.

In one of the most unlikely political alliances of recent years, the Green Party is teaming up with the No campaign to fight the UK adopting the single European currency.

Green activists, more used to battling global capitalism, have teamed up with Save the Pound campaigners - to push the case most commonly associated with eurosceptic Tories. The Greens claim the euro will hand control of the economy to an undemocratic central bank, speeding up the process of globalisation. They are campaigning to give economic control back to local communities and governments.

Winning side

She continued: "The fundamental lack of credibility and legitimacy, which can only get worse in the EU, will affect the level of democracy in our everyday lives." The Greens want communities and local governments to take control of their own economies and enable them to rebuild stability. This is a model not only for Britain but also for all the regions of the world, Ms Lucas said.

This addition to the ranks of the Eurorealists has been followed today by the announcement of Labour Against the Euro (LATE), a new grouping of Labour MPs and others who are opposed to the single currency. Again the fact of their opposition appears to catch the media by surprise, reporters finding the news almost incredible. Either the media is dominated by half educated know nothings, who are too lazy to look beyond a simple minded set of assumptions, or there is a deliberate attempt to portray Eurorealists as merely reactionary Tories in the hope of preventing those on the left from voicing their support for policies opposed to the EU. Take your pick.

These latest developments should give heart to Eurorealists as our message about the true nature of the EU is clearly being heard and believed.

21/03/2002

We are hearing a great deal of criticism from the British, and other European governments, directed at Robert Mugabe for his lack of respect for democracy. However perhaps we should look to the beam in our own eye.

A CIB activist reports that he had been in dispute with his local council over their refusal to place literature opposing the EU on their shelves, to appear alongside that extolling its so called virtues. Despite writing to, and meeting the official concerned, he has been unable to make them accept that they have a legal duty to present a balanced view. Indeed the library's 'EU specialist' has made it clear that he is an enthusiastic supporter of the EU, and can see nothing wrong in the fact that all the literature he provides is published by Brussels. The existence of an Act of Parliament requiring the library service to carry information giving both sides of an argument means nothing to this arrogant man who, despite being a librarian, declares that "Oh well. You can get that sort of information on the Internet".

The world of the EU is becoming more and more like the nightmare world of Kafka, where a reasonable person is helpless before faceless bureaucrats, who blatantly disregard the duty they have to democracy and act solely in the interests of the political class.

Contrary to those who foolishly believe democracy to be the product of a weak liberalism and that dictatorships are more efficient the reverse is true. That this is so can be seen from the example of Japan which, despite its industrial strength, is now in deep trouble, because the effective one party system which has governed the country since World War II has institutionalised corruption and ensured that decisions are taken in the interests of the political elite, not in the interests of the people, or the economic well-being of the nation. This is the trap into which the EU is falling for, as those who run the organisation become more and more divorced from democratic accountability, so their self interest will override all other considerations. It is democracy alone which prevents endemic corruption and the lack of same in the EU will ensure that its economy will eventually fall victim to the same sickness as always afflicts dictatorships.

17/03/2002

At the Barcelona EU summit, as anticipated, the French government has refused to budge on opening up their gas and electricity markets to British and other suppliers. That they should act in this way is no surprise, as it is in the interests of their own people that they should take this line. However, for all those British Europhiles who constantly tell us that we should sacrifice our nation in order to enjoy the benefits of a single market it is yet another embarrassment, or would be if they were capable of feeling that emotion. Mr Blair describe the summit as 'make or break' for EU economic reforms but one doubts he will now accept that 'make' has failed and choose to 'break' the EU instead. How the French must laugh at us.

17/03/2002

There have been a number of items this week which illustrate either the iniquities of the EU or the stupidity of those who defend it:

• Sir Stephen Wall, head of the European secretariat at Downing Street, opined that Euroscepticism could be traced back to the anti Catholics of the reformation and to the failure of the British people to recognize the end of empire in the late 1950s. It obviously does not occur to this man that Eurorealists oppose the EU because it is undemocratic and an economic disaster for the peoples of Europe. His inability to recognize the reality causes him to seek explanations in fantasy

• Ben Gill, President of the National Farmers' Union, is the co-author of a letter to today's Daily Telegraph which attacks the failure of the British government to oppose EU directives which are damaging British agriculture. This is rich from a body which has consistently supported UK membership of this vile organisation and which aided and abetted the surrender of the powers to Brussels which Mr Gill now wishes to see used to halt the tide of legislation threatening to overwhelm us. A matter of being hoist by their own petard.

• latest reports on exports of British beef show that no significant recovery is taking place, not least because of the refusal of the French to allow it into France. This is a blatant defiance of EU rules but of course no effective action is taken against one of its two real ruling nations.

• The French (again) are refusing to liberalise their gas and electricity markets so that, while Downing Street is lit by a French owned company, no British firm can compete to supply households in Paris. The leaders of the EU are said to be "bowing to political reality and accepting the French refusal to open the consumer energy market to competition". One can only admire the French for standing up for their own interests and wish that our pusillanimous politicians would do the same for us, over fishing, agriculture, industry etc., etc.

• Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy commissioner, has said that "the policy making councils of ministers were dysfunctional and that meetings of EU heads of state were increasingly preoccupied with drafting statements or inappropriate exercises in self-congratulation". Even the organisation's senior functionaries are recognizing what a joke (sick) the whole thing is.

• EU plans for the recycling of electrical goods will cost Britain £500 million a year, according to a leaked government report. An extra cost of £315 million a year will fall on local authorities, already struggling with the previous lunacies perpetrated by the EU regarding fridges and cars.

So it goes on - a litany of disaster. How much longer before we recognize that the only solution is to withdraw from the whole sorry mess?

12/03/2002

The Italian minister for Devolution and leader of the Northern League, Umberto Bossi, has lashed out at the European Union and all its doings. In a two-hour speech, he called for "civil resistance against the invasion of EU laws"; he attacked "the domination of the technocracy"; he spoke of "a rootless bureaucratic machine" and of "a questionable process which is endangering our liberty". "Whoever wants a Europe without states wants a superstate. He wants a Soviet Union designed by Stalin. He wants a supreme judicial power superior to the sovereignty of the people. He wants a Jacobin Europe which purges sovereignty with the supremacy of judicial power." Bossi even said that whoever moves away from parliamentary democratic rule is "a new facist": "The new fascism is the refusal of popular sovereignty." Any Europe which does not respect its peoples would therefore be a fascist Europe.

It is a shame that we have to rely on an Italian politician to state the truth that should, long ago, have been shouted from the rooftops by members of the Mother of Parliaments. Mr Bossi may have his faults but this speech cuts through the hypocrisy in which so many of the European political elite wallow and puts the facts squarely before the world. Those who support the EU are not progressive, well meaning liberals but fellow travellers of fascists who are seeking to destroy democracy throughout the Continent. One wonders why his remarks were not reported by the BBC. A real mystery.

06/03/2002

There are still some naive people who think that the European Parliament is a democratic institution, which can be trusted to take over the functions of parliaments such as Westminster, in order to run the single European state in accordance with the wishes of the electorate. Jeffrey Titford, Leader of UKIP, and the MEP for the Eastern Regions makes clear just what a farce the European Parliament truly is:

MEP's are asked to vote on literally hundreds of amendments during voting sessions in the European Parliament, most of which they will know very little about. Such is the volume of material they need to study that, even with the best will in the world, it would take a team far larger than most of them can muster to do each item justice. We strive to become experts at filleting the material or rely on summaries. This is a risky business as mistakes can have far reaching consequences.

Only at voting time does the Parliament chamber fill up, often to near capacity. So we go through this charade, this parody of democratic process as MEP after MEP takes his or her numbered seat, placing their smart cards in the electronic voting machine terminals. In little more than an hour we may be required to cast 200 votes or more - one vote approximately every 20 seconds - each having a direct effect on the lives of hundreds, sometimes millions of people, led by a bored so-called president who sits at the front, for all the world like a weary teller in some huge Rank bingo hall.

The larger Parliamentary groups sometimes have their version of tic-tac men, who engage in baroque theatricals, holding their arms aloft, thumbs up or down, to tell their members how to vote. At irregular intervals, there are roll call votes. These are cast electronically and the results displayed on a giant screen with an animated picture of a hand putting a slip into a ballot box. Seconds later, after the president has declared the vote closed, the result flashes up on the screen and it is on to the next vote. As soon as the voting is done the chamber empties faster than a burning cinema.

Remember, in this Parliament there are no private members bills. Not a single measure originates in the Parliament itself. Every directive and regulation is written by the European Commission and passes through this charade to become European Law. That it should become law is preordained. Even if the assembly, struck by some aberration, decided to vote against, it would make no difference. The measure would then go through an additional procedure called 'conciliation', where the vote can be overturned and the original reinstated.

The truth is that the European Parliament is nothing but a fig leaf, used by the real rulers of the EU, to deceive the gullible and ill informed into believing that the institution has any democratic credibility. Mr Titford's account of life in the parliament should open the eyes of all but the most Eurofanatic.

04/03/2002

The latest issue of "These Tides" is well worth reading. There is a report from Malta, as it comes under pressure to sign away its independence by joining the EU, from Euroland, where many of our European comrades make clear how much they loath the advent of the single currency, and from an international conference in Prague where libertarians voice their hatred of the EU. Additionally the magazine contains an important article calling for an umbrella group to challenge "Britain in Europe", another on the need to help the Swedish people defeat their own Euro traitors and a thought provoking article on capitalism.

An interview with a leading Polish eurosceptic gives the lie to the oft made claim that Poland is gung ho for EU membership while an article on Italy warns of the dangers of a simplistic view of that nation's politics.

Perhaps most significant are a report on the meeting held by the "Alliance pour la Souverainete de la France" where it was made clear that many French people hate the EU as much as we do, while an article by the Democracy Movement points to the growing threat of the EU Police State.

Like CIB "These Tides" is a cross party entity and there will be much that not all will agree with. However it is part of the Europe wide cause to save the peoples of the EU from the bureaucratic dictatorship which now threatens them and deserves support by Eurorealists. Their London address is These Tides, PO Box 4226, London, W1A 6FA and the cost is £12 for six issues.

03/03/2002

A report in today's Sunday Times states that Romano Prodi wishes to recruit almost 4,000 more Eurocrats, despite calls in Britain to use the debate on the future of Europe to cut the powers of the Brussels executive.

Given the real nature of the EU this is no surprise, any more than is the accompanying report that Olaf, Europe's anti-fraud watchdog, has claimed that public money has been secretly used to finance political parties in France, Belgium and Germany, and that Olaf is recommending criminal investigations should take place.

Equally unsurprising is the report that the European Commission is to be reprimanded this week by the European court of auditors which will state, for the seventh year running, that 5% of the EU's annual budget, about £2.5 billion pounds, has been lost to fraud.

The corruption in many European states is centuries old and will never be eradicated. We in Britain, despite the rather petty, although deplorable, cases concerning cash for questions, have been complacent that our public life is above such things. However the lead story in today's Sunday Telegraph shows how wrong we are to believe that we have escaped the corroding effects of corruption, based not on overt payments, but on a grubby pursuit of office and power by the political class.

Secret documents leaked to the paper reveal that the Foreign Office is trying to force British troops to serve in the proposed European Army in a mission which the Ministry of Defence believes would unnecessarily risk their lives as the organisation is incapable of undertaking the task concerned.

A letter from the office of the Foreign Secretary, dated 17th January, contains these words "If we look like becoming isolated, we would do better to accept an EU mission...The political case for doing so would be strong"

So there we have it. The Eurofanatics are not content with sacrificing our farming industry to the CAP, our fishing industry to the CFP, undermining our manufacturing base and destroying our democracy, in order to secure their place in the club of European elites. They are now prepared to actually risk the lives of our soldiers to please their masters in Brussels. Someone's son, husband or father can die in order that these pygmies can strut their little hour on a wider stage. This really is corruption on a sickening scale.

The efforts of a few parts of the media, such as the Sunday Telegraph to alert the electorate to the truth are laudable but the bias of the electronic media, in particular the BBC, undoes much of the good. This morning, on "Broadcasting House", the newspapers were reviwed by the usual suspects from the chattering classes, who can always be relied upon to ignore the iniquities of the EU in favour of slamming their own nation. No one mentioned this truly horrific story on the European Army but one gentleman chose to attack the monarchy, no doubt thinking that this proved his radical credentials. That anyone should think it necessary to fight a battle won centuries ago as far as effective power is concerned, while ignoring the wholesale undermining of the nation by a self interested political elite, shows the mentality of those who appear on such programmes and of those who control the BBC.

So the British public slumbers on, lulled by mindless game shows, lotteries and the vastly over hyped importance of sports such as football, into ignoring the destruction of their own country. Never has the old story of "Bread and Circuses" been so apt.

Those guilty of the betrayal may yet enjoy the fruits of their actions while those who sat by and did nothing will reap a bitter harvest. If unchecked this disease will prove terminal.

03/03/2002

The great and the good of the European Union are assembling, under the chairmanship of that most elitist of Frenchmen Valery Giscard d'Estaing, to consider the future of the union. The Europhiles fondly imagine that they are some sort of latter day founding fathers, imitating those who created the United States of America, while in reality they are nothing of the sort.

The founders of America were creating a new nation, which shared a common language and values, and they were intent on providing enduring democratic institutions which would ensure that the ordinary people could be the masters of their own fate. The arrogant European elites are determined to make a single state from ancient nations, holding very different views of the world, and not even sharing a common language. In addition they wish to impose a structure which will ensure that democratic accountability is destroyed and that they themselves will rule despite of, not because of, the wishes of the people.

There seems to be no end to the self delusion of these petty politicians, nor to the weasel words the Europhiles produce to defend the indefensible. A spokesman for the Foreign Office described those attending the convention as "positive, pragmatic, focused people with a strong sense of purpose. The Commission looks ready to roll up its sleeves and get down to the job in hand".

This ludicrous statement only makes sense if one deconstructs it in the light of reality:

• they are positive they want a single European state

• they are pragmatic in that they lack any principles save those of personal advancement

• they are focused on destroying the ancient nation states of Europe

• their strong sense of purpose is to destroy democracy and replace it with government by an immovable elite

• it they do roll up their sleeves it will only be so that they can better get at the trough

The peoples of Europe should treat this convention with the contempt it so richly deserves

01/03/2002

As always with matters concerning the European Union what was unthinkable yesterday, becomes a subject for consideration today and absolutely inevitable tomorrow.

Yesterday's pronouncements by Jack Straw on a European constitution and Gerhard Schroder on the harmonisation of European fiscal policy confirm the validity of the warnings opponents of UK involvement in the project have been giving since its inception.

Straw is now pushing for further erosion of national vetoes and for the creation of a 'legal framework' which, in a similar way as Prodi did when he said of the European Army that "You can call it Marianne if you wish but it is still an Army", he chooses to call 'a piece of paper, or a constitution'. Straw goes on to say that "member states pooling sovereignty helps us strengthen our significance as nations". If he really believes this then he must be feeble minded. Does he think Kansas has significance as a nation because it has pooled its sovereignty within the USA?

Schroder is calling for the European Union to determine taxation policies within member countries. In his words "we want the Europeanisation (sic) of everything to do with economic and financial policy". This is precisely what Eurorealists said would happen after the launch of the Euro, because no single currency can hope to survive unless it has one single government behind it. As we said time and again the Euro is a political device which, like the Wooden Horse of Troy, it was intended should be ushered into the bosom of the nations involved and from whence will spring all the warriors of federalism. Those who have joined have drunk from a poisoned chalice which will destroy their nations.

These proposals are an inevitable part of the process which has always been intended to end in a single European state, run by institutions which are fundamentally undemocratic, and which will enable the political elite to escape from the need to be accountable to the people.

The question facing the British people is not, therefore, do you want to join the Euro, but do you want to cease being citizens of a democratic and independent nation-state and become instead citizens of a province of a new European empire, run by bureaucratic diktat. Merely to ask the question shows what the answer should be.

22/02/2002

In one scene from Charlotte Grey, the new film about the SOE, a vile French bureaucrat of the Vichy regime is doing his German masters dirty work and rooting out anyone with Jewish ancestry in order to send them off to the death camps. As he is interrogating one man he says "Collaboration is the highest form of patriotism, it enables France to survive". This justification is not merely a blatant lie, as France could not survive as a nation without honour, obeying the dictates of the Nazis, but is also a deliberate attempt to cover up the truth, that the men of Vichy betrayed all that their nation stood for in order to preserve and advance their own positions.

Eventually the honour of France was restored by the heroes of the resistance and the Vichy regime is remembered as the nest of traitors it was.

Now we have in Britain large numbers of the political class who again use weasel words to justify their support for the transfer of the governance of this nation to a foreign power and the subjugation of their own people to laws and diktats made, not by their own elected representatives, but an alien body of unelected bureaucrats.

Today the media reports how Peter Hain, the Minister for Europe (and incidentally, why do we need such a minister - we do not have a Minister for the USA, our greatest friend and ally?), saying that those who oppose the UK becoming part of the European single currency are "The enemies of Europe" and that to rule out joining the Euro would be "a tragedy". This sort of hysterical rhetoric shows how desperate the Europhiles are that they are not going to be able to deceive the British people into voting Yes in any referendum on the issue and see their beloved membership of the cosy club of European elites being put at risk.

Peter Hain at least has the excuse that he is not actually British but pronouncements by Lord(!) Howe yesterday show just how far the poison has spread among our home grown politicians. He stated, as part of his attack on the Metric Martyrs and from his elevated position as Chairman of the UK Metric association (another of these Pooh-Bahs who turn up everywhere), that the fact the UK still retained the pint and the mile was "a national disgrace".

The Conservative party need not look far for reasons why it has lost millions of supporters when one of its major figures (though by no means the only one to do so), who was a leading figures of a party whose very name implies a conservation of the British way of life, was, and is, so committed to handing this country over to Brussels that he cannot stand the slightest defiance of the plans to make this country conform to every whim of the European Union.

A great country, like a great oak, cannot easily be overthrown by frontal assault. However when its foundations are undermined from within then indeed it may succumb. During the war we always felt that, had Germany succeeded in conquering this country, they would not have found the sort of support from the British people that they obtained from the men of Vichy. However the extent to which so many within the UK have supported the take-over of this nation by a supranational organisation makes clear that we were perhaps too optimistic then, and that we would be foolish to belief any such thing now.

France redeemed herself and became once again a great and honourable nation. Who will redeem the peoples of Europe now?

20/02/2002

This is not about a pound of bananas. Today the treason committed by the British political class over the past thirty years has been confirmed. In the words of Lord Justice Laws, as judgement was given against the heroes who have defied the EU, "the specific rights and obligations which European law creates are incorporated in our domestic law and rank supreme". Of course it is not the judges who are to blame but the politicians.

There is therefore no longer any cause for hand wringing commentators to ask Why, oh why, are people no longer voting in elections?. This decision makes clear that it is not those who are elected by the people who now run Britain, but those such as that fat, self satisfied Tory, Patten, who failed to win in Bristol, or the Welsh Labour windbag, Kinnock, who was rejected by the electorate even when the alternative was John Major.

The question Sir James Goldsmith asked in the 1997 campaign "Who Governs Britain" has been answered and the answer is Brussels.

The result of this case makes clear that no legal challenge to those who are determined to make this country a province of the new European empire will succeed. If we are to break free the people must replace those who have so betrayed the trust placed in them by those who believe in democracy and the right of Britain to be an independent state. The time is short!

18/02/2002

On 4th February 2002, just four weeks after the much hyped launch of the euro notes and coins, the Western Morning News, a leading newspaper in the West country, published the astounding results of its own 'referendum' on the euro. They asked readers to vote on three statements: The proposition 'Join the euro now' received 107 votes, 'Join when conditions are right' received 146 votes and 'Never join the euro' received a colossal 5,444 votes. Is it not time for the Europhiles to start taking notice of public opinion on the euro and stop trying to bend it? Never in the field of politics have so many politicians fought for such a thoroughly unpopular policy against such an enormous public opposition. The relentless and, ultimately, fruitless pursuit of eminence within the European Union being undertaken by the political class is creating an ever widening schism between those who claim to represent the people and the voters on this vital issue.

17/02/2002

Normally one ignores those items concerning ridiculous EU regulations, as these are not the main reason why Eurorealists wish to withdraw from the organisation, the future of democracy being more important than the question of whether Brussels is really concerned about bent bananas. However there are times when a story is so amazing that one feels it necessary to comment and a report in The Times this week is one such.

A directive, receiving its second reading in the European Parliament, is seeking to reduce workplace noise levels. This may seem to be a worthy cause but the idiots in the parliament are extending it to include music played in concert halls, thereby making it impossible for hundreds of pieces of classical music to be played at all. When this was pointed out to them one of their arrogant bureaucrats said "Noise is noise. It doesn't matter whether it's Tchaikovsky or a power drill"

Among other works this directive will ban Verdi's Requiem, large parts of Wagner's Ring cycle, numerous pieces from Bizet's Carmen and, ironically, the EU anthem, the finale of Beethoven's Ninth.

What this story shows is the unstoppable arrogance of the EU bureaucrats who draw up these directives, the idiocy of the puppets who sit in the European Parliament calling themselves representatives and our own stupidity in putting up with the whole ridiculous farrago in the first place.

A CIB supporter, Richard Carter, reports that the EU also plans a pub noise ban. They contend that noise therein should be no higher than 87 decibels, but tests have shown that normal pub noise reaches more than 100 decibels even without music. However it would be very interesting to see some whey faced EU lickspittle going into a pub down the Mile End Road and telling the customers to be quiet - one suspects he might find that the diktats of Brussels are not held in high regard among ordinary people.

17/02/2002

Latest reports indicate that the Germans are to escape the promised censure by the European Commission because they have reached a cosy deal with the French that the latter will oppose any such criticism in return for German support for a Frenchman to be appointed as the new head of the European Central bank.

Eurorealists clearly recognize that Germany should, as indeed should all independent nations, have the right to manage their own economy in their own interests. However, in this case, the German politicians are part of that political class that has deliberately destroyed that national independence they now wish to exercise. Certainly Germany should go ahead and break the stability pact, as long as we can revoke the Common Fisheries Policy and the Common Agricultural Policy. Or could it be that some are more equal than others?

10/02/2002

The European Commission has just criticised Germany and Portugal for running budget deficits that will, unless sharply corrected, soon breach the Stability Pact of the single currency.

Now these two countries voluntarily jumped off the cliff with the other lemmings, so they are legitimate targets for such criticism. However the European Commission also took it upon themselves to add the UK to the list of countries to be attacked on the same basis. They informed the British Government that £10 billion must be cut from public spending, at a time when the British electorate are desperate for more to be spent on the failing health service and the railways, among others.

What unbelievable arrogance this is. The UK has not yet and, we hope never will, joined the Euro, but the dictators of Brussels have, by their usual sly manoeuvring, placed the British Government in a position where, under regulation 1466/97, the UK has to submit to the stability programme required of euroland and, to add insult to injury, to "avoid exchange rate misalignments"

How much longer are we to accept the diktats of this vile organisation? It is time they were told to get lost and our economy was run in our interests, not in those of Brussels. Before voting in any referendum the British people should note that one of the costs of Euro entry would be £10 billion cut from public spending.

02/02/2002

The totalitarian tendencies of 'New' Labour, and indeed of all those who join them in their worship of the EU, are exposed more each day

The following details come from the January 2002 edition of The Farmer

• New EU legislation to reclassify all medicines for farm livestock and horses as "Prescription Only Medicines" means farmers and riders would be unable to purchase many medicines through their local saddler or farming supplies merchant. At present many non-prescription medicines commonly used to protect health and welfare of both farm animals and horses are available through registered suppliers who employ professionally qualified staff.

  Making these available only on veterinary prescription will further damage the viability of agricultural merchants in the UK, who are already suffering because of decline in farm incomes, by taking away a substantial part of their turnover almost overnight. Many of the 3,500 people whom currently hold a professional qualification allowing them to authorise the sale of animal medicines could end up losing their jobs. The inevitable result will be the development of a black-market in animal medicines as exists in the EU where there is no competition in supply to keep prices down.

• There are controversial plans to make the UK a non-protected zone for the sugar beet disease rhizomania. The proposals, due to be debated in Brussels, will not just affect beet growers but growers of crops such as potatoes who will then only be able to export to other rhizomania "dirty" countries. Farmers who currently sell items like seed potatoes to other clean areas - outside Europe as Europe is mainly classed as a "dirty" area - would lose their market. UK farmers fear that their voices will not be heard in Europe against the louder noises coming from French and German farmers who are envious of the UK's clean status. Europe doesn't like having these different systems. Holland, France and Germany are the main players and if they have rhizomania over there they want Britain to share the pain.

• Livestock farmers throughout England fear for the future of their businesses after the announcement of proposed new regulations covering the disposal of farm manure. This means the EU's Nitrate Vulnerable Zones could be extended to 80% or even the whole of the English countryside. This means lorries transporting manure and slurry from region to region. Farmers would have to build huge new stores to collect manure and slurry at vast cost. Ironically these proposals will have a profound impact on expanding organic dairy and beef farms, where the use of manure is an integral part of the management of the system. The reasons for this unnecessary, bureaucratic and hugely expensive EU regulation are risks to health. But World Health Organisation research has shown conclusively that no such risk exists.

• The UK interpretation of the European directive on Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) will mean farmers having to jump through bureaucratic hoops simply to plough their fields. Any land not ploughed in the previous year would have to have an EIA. Only where grassland has more than 25% ryegrass will farmers be sure that they do not need permission from the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to plough it or to plant new crops. The CLA says this is a clear case of "gold-plating" only a month after the government pledged there would be no more.

In the same issue of The Farmer there was a report of a meeting of NFU members in Staffordshire where in a vote only one member voted to leave the EU. Talk about turkeys voting for Christmas!

To turn to the fishing industry, a story originating in the Yorkshire Post on 17th December 2001

Marie Antoinette, before being seized and guillotined, when told about the lack of bread to feed the population famously said "Let them eat cake"! Now our fisheries minister is proving a reincarnation of that foolish Queen. Elliot Morley has advised fishermen to "concentrate on superior fish... the days of cheap fish are over!"

We all know that the insane EU fisheries policy, for which Morley is an apologist, has destroyed as many fish as have been landed for sale (the rest discarded dead at sea) but this remark takes the biscuit! The fishermen, being a restrained and polite body of men, replied "It's wonderful that Mr Morley has all the answers. If we had known it was that simple we wouldn't have spent months trying to scrape by on a pittance. The industry's dying and he tells us to look out for better fish. Just tell us where to drop the nets".

These items show just how damaging membership of the EU is to British interests, but still we find farmers voting to stay in the EU and fisherman, wanting to escape from the CFP, but refusing to recognize that this can only be done by leaving the EU. Large sections of the British people seem to have a death wish!

26/01/2002

Independent projections made for the first time using the Treasury's own model of the economy confirm that the UK would need to negotiate a sharply lower exchange rate for euro entry if joining were not to mean a heavy toll of growth and jobs.

The cost in the first three years alone is estimated to be £8 billion in lost output and more than 150,000 jobs and that at a rate below the current one. This would mean that the UK employment rate would be 3.6 per cent, instead of the 3.1 per cent projected if we remain outside the single currency.

The analysis, for the Ernst and Young Item Club concludes that there would be a serious loss of manufacturing competitiveness and that "the high exchange rate would effectively freeze over the split in the economy between manufacturing and services"

The same company projects that Britain's economy will continue to outperform the eurozone and the rest of the Group of Seven leading economies in 2002.

Given the above why would the UK even contemplate joining euroland, as no artificial attempts to lower the exchange rate will work, a lesson that central banks have learnt from bitter experience. If our political class do force us in then they will knowingly be sacrificing this country's prosperity to their own selfish interest. Manufacturing jobs would be sacrificed by the hundreds of thousands so that these pygmy politicians could strut on a wider stage.

21/01/2002

Somewhat to the surprise of many commentator's, the poor prospects for the euro, and euroland, have been acknowledged in the European Commission's own EU Economy 2001 Review. This accepts that the one size interest rate is causing major problems for several EU members and, in particular, that "a significantly higher rate would have been appropriate for Ireland, Portugal, Finland, Holland and Spain". It also accepts that the corrective mechanisms are not working as they should.

The Review describes the condition of Portugal as "alarming" and admits that the Irish economy is vulnerable to violent swings in the economic cycle because it has more in common with the British and US economies than with continental Europe. Commenting on Ireland's current economic difficulties, Bernard Connolly, a former high ranking EU official, wrote in the Irish Times on 31st December:

"It is ironic that this humiliation should come just a few days after Argentina was reduced to riots, twenty seven deaths, debt defaults and a state of siege. What Argentina is suffering now, Ireland will very likely suffer over the next two or three years".

However these inevitable disasters will merely be used by the EU to force further integration. Prodi said recently that the euro will create a crisis that will allow the EU to accumulate a whole set of economic policy weapons that it has so far been politically unacceptable to advocate while the German Finance Minister, Hans Eichel, said "The currency union will fall apart if we don't follow through with the consequences of such a union. I am convinced we will need a common tax system" (Sunday Times, 23rd December 2001).

It is clear that the EU is playing the game well known to those who fleece unwary gamblers. The further the latter is drawn in, and the more he has lost, the more impossible it seems that he can get up and walk away, but is inveigled into hazarding more and more, in the vain hope that he will regain that which he has lost.

However, unlike the gambler we could easily withdraw from the game if we had the will to do so. We would instantly gain financially by ending the payment of the enormous fees we pay to be members, we would escape from the Common Agricultural Policy, and regain our fishing grounds by withdrawal from the Common Fishing Policy. In addition we could put an end to the EU regulations that have entered our law, possibly by adopting the expedient used by the government of Charles II after the Restoration, when all laws passed under the Commonwealth were declared invalid. This may seem drastic but it is much less so than seeing the end of hundreds of years of British independence. All that is needed is that, in the words of the Bastard at the end of Shakespeare's King John, "nought shall make us rue, If England to itself do rest but true". It is really up to us.

19/01/2002

On the same day the German finance minister warns the British that we must join the Euro, or become weak, and Peter Hain repeats yet again his mantra that membership of the single currency is inevitable, reports from Germany indicate that its economy is stagnating, with unemployment rising remorselessly. It is generally agreed that this latter circumstance is due to Germany joining the Euro at too high a rate, something which they cannot now correct. In addition the stability pact, upon which Germany insisted, prevents any stimuli to the German economy, as increased spending, or reduced taxes, will breach the agreed limits.

In view of the above one can only conclude that the German finance minister is motivated by that oldest of truths "Misery loves company".

In addition the Europhiles often claim, falsely, that the EU has been a force for peace. If the straightjacket into which the Euro has now placed Germany causes that country's economy to decline, while at the same time preventing the German people from changing anything through the ballot box, then the risk must be that they will once again be forced to turn to authoritarianism as a solution, something which would not augur well for the future peace of Europe.

In passing, it is worth noting that in early January, when it became plain that a number of developed nations were capable of delivering boxes of coins without dropping them on their f