Aussies call it as it is - 'US snubbed as Britain redirects military ties'
Tomorrow's The Sydney Morning Herald has a headline that pulls no punches on the reality of the momentous, foolhardy and treacherous step undertaken by the British Government this past weekend:
Britain has taken a dramatic step towards a full-fledged European army, signing up to Franco-German proposals for a planning headquarters outside NATO.
The deal, reached by British, German and French officials in secret talks in Berlin last week, establishes an operational command in Brussels, allowing the European Union to run day-to-day battlefield missions for the first time.
Risking a major clash with Washington, it points to a definitive break with British defence doctrine of the past half century......
Donald Rumsfeld Cautions on Duplicate EU Command Post
EU Business reports a moderate but concerned initial reaction to the reported EU Defence Agreement from the US Secretary of Defence. It is headlined 'Rumsfeld cautions against EU moves to create separate military planning' and quotes him as saying:
"I certainly think that NATO has a fabulous record over my adult lifetime contributing to defense and deterrence and a more peaceful world," he told reporters here ahead of a two-day meeting of NATO defense ministers.
"Therefore I would say anything that puts at risk that institution, you would have to have a very good reason for wanting to do it. I think there is no reason for something else to be competitive with NATO," he said.
What we have yet to hear from any French, German, British or even EU spokesman is any rational justification for what they are proposing. Should any be forthcoming we will immediately post it on this blog....but suggest you don't wait up!
The extreme Euro-Federalist distortions of Britain's pink business daily reach new heights of absurdity in this report just filed, hailing the Naples Foreign Ministers meeting a success. Read it if you wish from here if you must, though it contains nether fact nor new information as far as I can see.
More enjoyable, informative and accurate is this item from Newsweek: The New, New Europe the introduction states:
For much of the past year, Europe has been divided over America and its war in Iraq. Now it is divided against itself. The chief culprits: France and Germany.
The article concludes as quoted below, but it is worthing reading through to see exactly how accurate this paragraph really is:
A Europe divided against itself—as it is now over the Franco-German alliance—is a Europe in the slow lane, falling further behind the United States. Time is not necessarily on Europe’s side, and it could prove the undoing of a Europe in protracted chaos.
An interesting independent view of next weeks crucial meetings at Nato can be read by using this link to IOL.co.za for an article titled 'EU defence deal faces US suspicions at Nato' from Reuters and written by John Chalmers.
In Washington D.C., newspaper readers will be surprised at the spin on the EU defence pact put out by Britain's Foreign Secretary last evening. According to this report from the Washington TimesDefense role for EU gets support the article summarises the agreement as follows:-
The plan would create a planning and command cell for the EU at NATO's military headquarters in southern Belgium. The EU could use the alliance's intelligence, communications network and transport planes for peackeeping operations under the proposal.
The proposed defense policy includes a mutual defense guarantee, similar to the one in the NATO treaty.
The paper later quotes the French Foreign Minister Mr de Villepin as calling the deal a "breakthrough" on defense
Three links to British Sunday Press coverage of the potential end of the Nato Alliance are in the post immediately following.
The Sunday Telegraph reports Jack Straw is refusing to disclose US reactions to the EU Defence deal and say it is being described as a 'Trojan Horse, read the article from here. Coverage from The Observer can be read from this link and from The Independent on Sunday's article Britain caught between Nato and EU as Rumsfeld flies in from here.
The Scotsman provides an attempted explanation from Jack Straw regarding the selling out of Britain's defence but no explanation for his belief stated yesterday that international agreements could be broken at will. (See today's first post). Straw Hits Back at Defence Plan Critics is the headline to the article, noteworthy for these totally conflicting statements:
First: He flatly rejected fears that the UK is risking good relations with Washington by reaching a deal with France and Germany on cementing an EU defence policy outside Nato.
followed a few paragraphs later with this statement: Other EU governments are likely to back a regime approved by the EU’s three big military powers, particularly if it counters what is seen in the post-Iraq war world as too much transatlantic influence on western defence strategy.
The two most senior office holders in the British Government - Tony Blair and Jack Straw cannot really, in all seriousness be expecting the British Public to believe the above objectives are anything but totally incompatible.
Straw also reverted to form in stating that several EU operations had already been mounted:
He pointed out there had in any case already been several military operations under the EU flag, where Nato as a whole did not want to intervene.
Several normally means three or more. All we can trace is a pathetic, mostly French, sortie to the Congo, which had some EU badges patched on the servicemen's uniforms just before departure. (This was originally designated a UN operation and was a typical EU bullshit exercise involving smoke, mirrors, huge wasted funds and zero benefits) The only other was a turnover exercise in Macedonia the objective again seems solely to provide justification for just this kind of treaty negotiation sleight of hand.
Recent developments are considered from a viewpoint contrary to that usually presented on this blog and the final paragraph quoted below we find truly implies the existence of a totally false dilemma:
The Sunday Times quoted a French diplomat prior to Blair’s meeting with Chirac insisting, “The British must choose. Either they are with us, united in Europe where they should be, or they are destined to become united with America, something like an American state.”
Why do so many powerful voices within the EU so frequently pose this false proposition, it makes all else they attempt so deeply suspect? (We do, of course, accept that readers of World Socialists are likely to take this view).
As the Foreign Ministers leave Naples everything is NOW reportedly still in the air (according to this latest EU Business report just in) except:
Consensus appears to have been reached on defence, at least.
Britain, France and Germany outlined plans in Naples to give the EU its own military planning facility independent of NATO.
Belgian's Foreign Minister Louis Michel said the plans had been well-received by the rest of the EU, although Straw was at pains to stress that NATO would remain at the heart of Europe's defences.
It was agreed that "any European Union auspices, defence activities, are handled in a way that is complementary to NATO, not in any sense a way that is alternative to NATO", he said.
This of course is the one absolutely critical area, the nation's most basic security arrangements, where not one inch should have been conceded. Now more than ever must the British people be given their say should this Constitutional Treaty ever survive its protracted process of creation. EU still far apart on new constitution as summit looms
More encouraging is another report from the same organisation Germany's Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer left an EU foreign ministers meeting in Naples Saturday "deeply concerned" about the chances of a successful conclusion to negotiations on the EU's first constitution.
"I'm leaving Naples more worried than before," Fischer told reporters
Read it all from here
Breakthrough has been achieved in a major collaps of one of Giscard's Pillars, the number of Commissioners according to this report from EU Business EU's constitution talks strike deal on Commission:
that every member state should be represented on its executive Commission, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said.
The article from which we copied this image proposes sweeping new powers to be placed in the hands of this man. The original and clearer image and the frightening proposals may be read from this link: Blair plans new laws to curb civil liberties
Extremists on both sides of the religious divide in Northern Ireland are victorious today, precisely because this man cannot be trusted!
'The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion' Edmund Burke
Donald Rumsfeld to Approve EU Defence Strategy next week in Brussels
This report from EU Business 'Big three' win EU over to military planning wing reports that the other EU Nations appear to have gone along with the proposed Defence arrangement. Non-EU Nato powers such as the USA, Norway (as reported below) and presumably others such as Canada an Turkey will also need to be convinced. US consideration is reported as most likely to be undertaken when :
US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell visit Brussels next week.
That anyway is the version of events from this report of EU Politix. Other reporst state Straw was caught flat-footed by de Villepin's premature announcement of an accord, and that plans to obtain pre-clearance from George W., were thrown out by his Thanksgiving trip to Baghdad.
Norway is also particularly concerned by this development, being a long-term and essential Nato partner but happily outside the clearly crumbling European Union. The Norway Post 'Norway's Role in European Defence Weakened.
EU Politix reports Britain's Foreign Minister as having been involved as follows:
Commissioner for institutional reform Michel Barnier had earlier on Friday clashed with UK foreign minister Jack Straw.
Barnier had publicly insisted on enforceable – by the commission – EU rules to ensure fiscal discipline to back up the euro.
In a heated exchange Straw disagreed.
“I take the opposite view,” he said.
“If you have a set of rules which conflicts with reality, reality wins.”
This is an extraordinary statement to have been made by any British Foreign Secretary. Let alone when attending an international gathering with twenty four other foreign ministers, to discuss a far reaching constitutional agreement scheduled to be finalised within a month and stated by his Monarch that very week, as planned to become law within another six months.
Remember that what he was referring to was another such agreement, solemnly entered into at Maastricht, the observance of which by Britain has been scrupulous notwithstanding its controversial nature.
Britain's Foreign Secretary has publicly stated that for him, and by implication his country -
International Treaties and Agreement have no meaning should he determine circumstances have changed!
Blair should summon him home from Naples immediately and dismiss him from office without further delay. Or is the Prime Minister similarly careless of the import of signed Treaties and agreements?
Britain, France and Germany agree Defence Proposal
According to a press statement made by French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin some form of agreement has been reached regarding a proposed joint European Defence arrangement that will be put to the other Foreign Ministers over tonight's dinner in Naples.
This is extremely bad news and largely offsets other encouraging prospects of no agreement on any subject that we have been reporting from Naples earlier. The brief statement can be read here.
Further detaoils will be posted as soon as they might become available. BBC World in its TV report of this development stated that the USA has not been informed of the apparent agreement. Another ominous sign!
According to this report the proposed mutual defence arrangement tabled by the Itaian's will be discussed by the EU Foreign Minister's this evening. This too is destined for the dustbin according to an item from EUpolitix Swedish and Finnish concerns over neutrality and fears of another Irish referendum failure should see the proposal does not survive.
European defence is both unnecessary with existing Nato Treaties and an underfunded joke under the existing political leaderships. Failure is the only sane outcome in that area.
This link to a Radio Nederland report has audio links to various Dutch spokesman on the week's damage to the Growth and Stability Pact. Headlined 'The pact isn't entirely dead' it reports this threat:
Dutch Finance Minister Gerrit Zalm, for instance, is set to stick to the right of each individual member state to veto the EU budget as a whole. This has been a moot point for the Netherlands, being relatively the largest net contributor to EU coffers.
and this suggestion of intimidation:-
"Some ministers had instructions from their prime ministers, so they had to vote against their own beliefs; others may have been intimidated by these two big countries."
Mr Zalm was referring to EU structural funds, which aim to bring poorer regions up to speed with the rest of Europe. France and Germany have the power to block the allocation of these funds to other member states.
The Foreign Office edited transcript is available from this link.
Ironies Selected Highlights:-
BBC
On Foreign Policy QVM"I assume I'm right in saying that you will reject the proposed amendment out of hand."
JACK STRAW:
Yes we will....
BBC
"They know that's your position, which must raise the possibility that this is just a tactic, a ploy to put you on the back foot and perhaps distract your energies from other areas where you've put those famous red lines".
JACK STRAW:
No I don't think it is a tactic....
BBC
"You are saying that it doesn't actually matter if you don't agree on this thing in the end. That the European Union will continue - it's not essential."
JACK STRAW:
Yes....
BBC
"Let's be absolutely clear about this, as it's a very important point. Are we to take it that it is now the British Government's position that despite all the months of effort that have been poured in to negotiating the text of a new Constitution for the European Union, if you don't do it, it doesn't matter?"
JACK STRAW:
No, I'm not saying it doesn't matter. We've never said it doesn't matter. It would matter, but life would go on, and what we said at paragraph 26 of the White Paper we published in September was this; and I quote - if a new treaty cannot be agreed or ratified then the European Union would still carry on under its current arrangements and it would have the same functions as today. It would not collapse.
BBC
"But the reason you're saying it must be that you're preparing us for failure." JACK STRAW:
No I'm not preparing anybody for failure, I'm just setting out what the facts are.
---------------
Meantime the Spanish Foreign Minister is reportedly determined to maintain the voting weights agreed at Nice and has also gathered British support according to EU Business Spain refuses to back down in EU Constitution row:
Spain and Poland have won the heavyweight backing of Britain, which says the EU could stick to the unloved compromises reached at Nice if the constitutional debate cannot find anything better.
November inflation estimate jumped from 2.0 pct in October to 2.2 pct in November according to a Press Release.
Meantime EU Politix reports the Italian Foreign Minister as preparing to dig his heels in to maintain the original convention draft as far as he can during the Naples meetings:
“The Italian presidency feels the responsibility to limit as much as possible modifications and additions… convinced that opening up debates already exhaustively conducted could hardly result in a more balanced and ambitious results,” Frattini said.
As the EU Foreign Ministers gather in Naples for the opening skirmishes in the final battle to save the Democracies and Freedoms of almost the entire continent of Europe, and more importantly its offshore islands, Britain's, or more accurately England's, one-time leading Eurosceptics appear to have withdrawn from the fray.
John Redwood, Conservative MP for Wokingham and author of books such as 'Death of Britain' and 'Just say No', writes in this morning's Daily Telegraph on the problems of the British motorist: How much more of a bashing does the motorist have to take?.
If this were an isolated incident we could shrug it aside. A couple of weeks back, however, Christopher Booker, (one of the most consistent and most published Eurocritical voices in the country), in his Sunday Telegraph 'Notebook' devoted a large part of his column to a diatribe against parking restrictions and the means of collection of long-outstanding fines.
Last Sunday he provided a plug for his book which at twenty pounds sets out to detail the "Secret History of the European Union". Imagine our astonishment when we learnt that on the same day in the Sunday Times Booker's co-author Dr Richard North (former adviser to the UK Independence Party's lamentable MEPs) was also being written about in connection with his campaign to make himself appear a martyr for the non-payment of multiple speeding fines.
We might be about to lose our Parliament, Democracy, Common Law Rights, Monarch, Defence, Foreign Policy and everything else that was once considered important about our nationality.....but the road traffic regime will assuredly be fully aired if left to these three!
The strength of the gold price has been interesting me for some time. This report in the Canadian National Post ascribes the most recent spike to a smell in the New York subway.
Musing on the collapse of the EU's Stability Pact an alternative scenario presents itself. All those one time National Central Bankers still mostly hold their jobs but have effectively no job with no currencies to manage. Being the well paid and well trained expert central bankers most of them undoubtedly are, they must surely have foreseen the eventual collapse of the Euro's foundation pact and contemplated their best course of action when the collapse of the Euro currency potentially follows. After all, once again they will be held to account!
Re-launching National Currencies will be a competitive business and each will require a solid underpinning, which has historically been gold. Much national gold was shipped off to Frankfurt on the Euro's launch and might eventually be reclaimable. But again it might not, what better insurance policy therefore than printing more Euros which in the long term appear useless and using them to discreetly buy up some gold.
The normal political instability that would seem to spark such gold price strength, seems to me to have been missing since Saddam's statue toppled.
Probably just nonsense, late night nonsense, caused by lack of sleep? Next stop USD450?
This report from EU Politix Brussels picks new fight with Berlin indicates more difficulties ahead over who should pay the EU's out of control housekeeping bills. The report implies that greatest resistance to increasing contributions from 1.0 to possibly as much as 1.3 per cent of GDP will likely come from Germany.
The reporters must assume that Blair will still be in 10 Downing Street when the budget comes to be discussed early next year. Let's all hope they are wrong!
I planned to link to this excellent report on the breakdown of the stability pact that appeared in Greece's Kathimerini earlier today, but then got diverted. The implication from this report is that Greece went along with allowing Germany and France to outrageously break and now destroy the pact that was their joint creation for what the International Herald Tribune said :
“Analysts speculated that there were various political motives among the countries that supported Germany and France, ranging from the personal ambitions of their leaders to negotiations for the future European Constitution,” the IHT’s Thomas Fuller reported from Brussels.
This renewed rumors of Prime Minister Costas Simitis’s ostensible ambitions to pursue a senior EU role, as he had said on Monday, just before the ECOFIN meeting, that he had been on the telephone with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and said that he (Simitis) was in favor of a compromise decision.
Aggravating the talks is anger at France and Germany for arm-twisting the organization into a deal this week that lets them violate the budget deficit rules for the 12 nations that use the EU's common currency, the euro. Spain, the Netherlands, Austria and Finland failed in their effort to force the two countries to cut government spending
A good overall summary comes from this link to Slate
What other deals or trade-offs sank the pact? No doubt many theories will soon appear!
President Prodi put out a meaningless statement on the pact's demise that appeared as a tailpiece to the Midday Express press briefing. Among many other minor items given greater precedence by the commission was a detailed description of a new pet passport with blue cover and yellow stars for dogs and cats. EU's Pet Passports
The images were taken by one of the magazine's photographers, Jerome Sessini, who was with the attackers - described in the accompanying article as "Iraqi guerrillas" -- at the time of Saturday's missile strike, editor-in-chief Alain Genestar told AFP Wednesday.
He said Sessini and a special correspondent sent to Iraq, Claudine Verniez-Palliez, had been with the group for several days beforehand and were unaware they were about to witness the attack.
Interestingly this comes only days after Chirac visited London and asked for trust. Last night, Blair's representative was in talks in Berlin with representatives from Germany and France regarding the future of Britain's defence.
Meantime British servicemen continue to put their lives at risk in Iraq while these talks continue in the German capital and Blair ingratiates himself on a popular French TV station. Is it any wonder that last evening our PM complained of severe stomach pain?
Blair's sellout of Britain's Nato Defence Relationship Continues
This report from SHAPE's press review highlights the continuing and ongoing danger posed to Britain's defences by the ambitions of the British Prime Minister:-
According to the Financial Times, Britain, France and Germany held special talks in Berlin Wednesday night to reach agreement on how the EU could create an independent planning unit for any military missions carried out separately from NATO. The newspaper quotes diplomats saying officials at Wednesday’s talks were hoping to draw up a draft defense paper in time for this weekend’s meeting in Naples of EU foreign ministers and those from the candidate countries. “If we don’t present the paper in Naples, we might do something at NATO next when the defense and foreign ministers will be meeting. This draft paper will be a very delicate exercise,” the newspaper quotes a diplomat saying. It notes that the paper will set out how the EU can establish such a planning unit and what kind of relationship it would have with SHAPE.
NB This draft paper will be a very delicate exercise Why? There can only be one answer, something tricky and far from straightforward is under consideration. There should be no need for such delicacies in matters regarding the mutual defence arrangements of true allies!
I was in France last week and able to watch amongst a French audience a well-rehearsed Tony Blair conduct a TV interview entirely in French with the TF2 channel. The extent of his continental ambitions was there made perfectly clear and reinforced for this viewer. If translated and shown in Britain, however, I believe many thousands would be surprised at the content and the manner of his replies. A British report is linked here from Expatica
These are the two clauses, proposed by the Italian Presdiency, that will permit subsequent amendments to the EU Constitution without the consent of the British Westminster Parliament:
a) as to the decision to move from unanimity to qualified majority, or from a special legislative procedure to the ordinary legislative procedure (general bridging clause), it is proposed that the text be amended to include a provision whereby if [X] national parliaments raise an objection that decision would not come into effect ("nihil obstat" procedure) [text in Annex 30 to Addendum 1];
b) as to the decision to amend the Constitution provisions on internal policies (Title III of Part III (special revision procedure), the Presidency maintains its approach as proposed to ministers at the last IGC meeting: no increase of competencies conferred on the Union in the Constitution, decision of the European Council by qualified majority and approval by all Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements. Such an approach would have the advantage of removing the requirement for an InterGovernmental Conference [text in Annex 31 to Addendum 1].
Note the suggestion that if [X] national parliaments raise an objection must imply that something less than unanimity is required. This proposal effectively destroys centuries of democratic rights painfully built over centuries of European history, which have come to be vested within the parliaments of the continent's nation states.
There are no proposals anywhere within the proposed Constitution to replace these parliaments with alternative democratic institutions or procedures
This item will be among the matters being discussed in Naples from tomorrow. It is totally unacceptable in any form. The minimum objective for this massive change in the constitutional arrangements of so many nations, must be that the terms agreed are clearly stated and only amendable by subsequent unanimity within another IGC.
The press reports from the German State Broadcaster Deutsche Welle Stability Pact -- Rubber Pact seem to grasp the seriousness of the hollow Franco - German deficit victory, more firmly than the quotes from Holland that we linked yesterday.
As a non-economist my reading of the situation is this: If twelve (now increasingly less likely one day to be a score or more) countries are all free to spend as much as they please in a currency that will devalue at the same rate for all, then the outcome is assured. Countries that spend the most the soonest will incur the least interest charges and the greatest real spending power. The devaluing money they later print to serve the debts will encourage others to board the gravy train but those who join the rush the latest will suffer the most.
Already in the Dutch press yesterday the editorials were urging that spending restraint be abandoned. As the above realisation grows the need for interest rates to rise will further spur the race to be the earlier borrower and the rates being paid yesterday will appear ever cheaper.
The rise of the Euro in the foreign exchange markets seems to me an aberration as the common euopean currency has had its foundations removed. The logical end result "Hyperinflation" or a "Pan-European seige economy with rigid foreign exchange controls". In either scenario economic hardship must result.
If an economist disagrees please e-mail the blog and I will post the counter-arguments. Or add a comment below!
If this is not the case then what was the point of the G & S Pact in the first place?
The Spectatorleading article returns to the push for there to be a British Referendum on the EU Constitution and touches upon other issues discussed on the blog today, concluding by saying:-
He (B. Liar - ed.) need not appear isolated, however, by agreeing to the proposal first put forward by this magazine to hold a referendum on the European constitution. Already, six nations have announced that they will be holding referendums — Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Denmark, Ireland and Luxembourg, while France, Italy and the Czech Republic are also likely to hold them. To belittle the constitution one day as a ‘tidying-up exercise’ and to portray it the next as a threat to our national life which must be defended by prime ministerial defiance is an unsustainable position. If he wants to demonstrate a will to stand up for British interests, he should first stand up for our love of democracy and let the people, not him, have the final say
Jack Sraw was once again performing in Parliament today, as reported in this item from The Scotsman:-
Mr Straw also pledged to resist moves to scrap the UK’s veto over foreign policy decisions and called for the treaty to include anti-federalist guarantees.
“We do not accept the idea of QMV for foreign policy decisions, except in a very specific way which is within the current published draft text, and we will resist that,” he said.
In other words, as detailed at length in the post earlier today (now beneath the bottle), this is very far from the tidying-up exercise Straw always previously maintained was the case!
Does the present British Foreign Secretary not realise that entering a negotiation with an intention that 'we will resist that' concedes the point as lost from the start. He also said in response to a question:
“Do I believe in miracles? No.
“What are the chances? I think the chances are reasonable but you can never predict these things until they have happened.”
Yet it is quite clear from the remainder of the report that the outcome is pre-determined as he repeatedly states he merely plans to resist, rather than veto, plans to have EU Foreign Policy subject to QMV and therefore determined by Brussels but applicable to the British Nation.
This is not an item for resistance It is absolutely unacceptable. If the Foreign Minister cannot see that then he should be fired as he clearly has no intention of resigning. Earlier today reports stated a Government spokesman as saying these proposals were unacceptable, now they are only to be resisted!
The Prime Minister deserves far worse than the severe stomach ache from which he is reported to be suffering , as he and his Foreign Secretary blithely relinquish the nation's own authority in the crucial aspect of the way in which its future relations with the outside world are to be handled.
The Leading Article in today's 'The Times' concludes "This is absurd. And it is certainly not democratic."
In another article from that newspaper by Anthony Browne titled 'Loony' we have the following: "THE British Government yesterday dismissed as 'unacceptable' a redrafted European constitution unveiled by Italy, holder of the European Union presidency, before the negotiations' critical two-week endgame.
Greatest concern centred on a surprise amendment making it virtually impossible for member-states to conduct independent foreign policy initiatives, such as the Iraq war. One British government source called that 'loony'."
The Foreign Policy problems plainly evident from our posting of yesterday evening is also the element seized upon by 'The Sun' heads its article EU 'to nobble our US links' while 'The Independent" reckons the proposal has only been included so that it can be later withdrawn as a concession to Britain.
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in the 'Daily Telegraph' also covers these items and comments positively on the defence arrangement amendments, he ends his article EU redraft robs Britain of foreign policy veto with the following:
So far London has failed to secure any change in a catch-all clause that gives Brussels the power to co-ordinate the economic and employment policy of member states.
North Sea oil, which makes up over 90 per cent of the EU's oil reserves, is still vulnerable to a Brussels take-over.
A totally new "revision clause" has been added allowing ministers to ram through future changes to the bulk of the constitution by qualified majority voting.
A senior EU diplomat called the manoeuvre "barking mad".
On 12th September we posted the Foreign Secretaries outrageous Parliamentary statement about the EU Constitution:
"The proposals in the current draft treaty do not change the fundamental relationship between the EU and its member states."
"On any analysis it involves less change than that in Maastricht and the Single European Act."
On 20th October we posted his follow-up statement to parliament, this time when standing in for the PM:
“The draft constitutional treaty is designed to improve the way the EU works after enlargement by reform, clarification and consolidation,” he insisted.
“The claims made by the Opposition and others that the treaty would undermine Britain’s independence are frankly absurd."
In unattributable briefings spread throughout the British media earlier this week, Jack Straw was quoted as the source for asserting the Constitution might be subject to a British veto!
How can the Foreign Secretary continue in his post?
We are forced to continue our 'Facts Flaws' series, where we post directly contradictory statements to Straw's lies from other EU Foreign Ministers, Prime Ministers and Presidents! Today's quote is from Bertie Ahern, the Irish Taoiseach who has described the :
forthcoming discussion on the future of Europe as 'amongst the most important' that Ireland will ever participate in.
We have been following the matter of the Executive Life scandal on this blog for some months and as it moves towards the final negotiations, (apparently deferred over the Thanksgiving weekend), more of the implications become clear. This report from The Washington Times concludes with the following paragraphs:
Since pulling out of a preliminary deal with the U.S. attorney in California last month, the French government had been insisting any settlement include an agreement not to prosecute Pinault and Jean Peyrelevade, the former chairman of French bank Credit Lyonnais SA.
France is concerned excluding the two men from the settlement would leave the government open to new legal attacks if U.S. prosecutors later were to exact compromising testimony or evidence from either of them.
Another factor is French President Jacques Chirac's friendship with both men. He has personally insisted that they be included in the settlement.
No mention here of any possible involvement by the new head of the European Central Bank Jean-Claude Trichet, who at one time had responsibility for the oversight of Credit Lyonnais and first prompted this blog's interest in the case. We shall nevertheless continue to watch developments. (Forbes latest report can be read here.)
We will be commenting in detail on this matter shortly. As the Dutch were amongst the strongest critics of the pact's total violation this link to the Press Review from Radio Netherlands seems the most appropriate link as a reference: Dutch Press Review 26th November 2003.
An analysis put out this afternoon by EUobserver seems to us rather inadequate, but can be read from here
According to this EUobserver report a 50 Page document has been tabled by the Italian Presidency ahead of a Foreign Ministers meeting in Nice later this week.
France may have avoided the fines that should have been levied under the Growth and Stability Pact (at the potential likely cost of the entire Euro project), but the Executive Life scandal rumbles on with yet another deadline extension now having been granted to 1st December according to this report from Forbes
In an attempt to stay current with events within the EU, posts will be somewhat sparse. Internet access seems difficult here in France, but the quality of our posts will hopefully benefit from on the ground news when we return next week.
Colin Powell proved beyond all doubt that one responsible thinking individual bests 25 Committee Men any time. The three Foreign Ministers of Britain, France and Germany went to Iran and were sold a pup. In the full tradition of the EU they then convinced the 22 other Foreign Ministers they knew what they were doing, all of whom presumably were only along for the lunch. Reuters Report
Powell said he had a "very candid discussion" with the EU Foreign Ministers, which in diplomatic terms is as close as you can come to saying your opposite numbers were talking from the backs of their heads. How is it, we must ask ourselves, the people supposedly amongst Europe's elite and charged with running the Foreign Affairs of their countries can be so cavalier with their citizen's safety?
It is, of course, the torpor and ineffectiveness brought on by the mammoth, corrupt and now totally non-functioning EU. There is only one cure - it must be dismantled, dismembered and totally deconstructed, so that elected accountabilty is restored to Europe's citizens.
This report from HiPakistan gives an overall report of Powell's Brussels trip while the FT covers the Defence Disputes that are likely to sour the atmosphere for Blair during George W Bush's London visit.
With a new transatlantic battle brewing over Iran's suspect nuclear program, US Secretary of State Colin Powell sought to win support here Tuesday for a sharp denunciation of Tehran from a wary Europe.
Other issues on the table at the day of talks, after which Powell flies to London to join President George W. Bush on a state visit to Britain, include a simmering dispute over EU defence plans and a spat over US steel tariffs.
But with the European Union generally satisfied with the new US plans for Iraq -- forced into fruition by worsening violence and instability -- the Iran issue appeared set to take the center stage.
The speech can be read in full from this link to Shout99.
After welcoming US Treasury Secretary, John Snow, Brown early on made this landmark statement:
In this new century our shared values across the Atlantic can become our common destiny. And Mr Secretary, I - and all of us here - stand for a Britain - as you stand for an America - that is outward looking, ambitious to succeed, determined to advance an enterprise culture, fully equipped to lead in the new global economy.
Later when he finally arrives at the topic of Europe he starts So as we seek, as pro Europeans linked to Europe by history, geography and economics, to build a global Europe --- flexible, outward-looking, reforming and open, far from an inward-looking trade bloc -
Can any set of descriptive phrases be farther from the actual EU being created today? Of course not!
Contrast the speech of Pat Cox President of the European Parliament as trailered by
epolitix
Is one of the previously most enthusiastic Eurofederalist Member States beginning to see the true horror of what is being created?
The following is quoted from a post on the FT Discussion fora on the Future? of the Euro yesterday afternoon:
"Private consumption dropped by 7.2% in Holland during august. This is now the sixth consecutive month that retail sales were lower compared to the corresponding month last year.
The biggest falls were noted in big ticket items and home furnishings.
On top of that new house completions have now dropped to a yearly 60.000 compared to 90.000 in 1999."
Viewed against the economic background painted above it is easy to see how seriously his concerns should be taken. He describes the present background within the Eurozone and compares the treatment of Ireland and Portugal over breaches of the Growth and Stability pact with the situation today.
He reserves his hardest comments to date on the behaviour of France and Germany, Mr Zalm agreed that some EU leaders were letting the citizens down. He believes that the euro rules are "a contract with every euro zone citizen" and constantly breaking them is akin to a betrayal of the people.
Mr Zalm sees the whole European project now endangered with heated exchanges ahead on 24th November. The Dutch Press support the concern shown by their Finance Minister with this quote from yesterday's Radio Netherlands Press Review:
The VOLKSKRANT devotes an editorial to this issue of power sharing in Europe and warns that Dutch voters may turn away from the European Union, if the parties deal too lightly with the issue and present the voters with an accomplished fact.
In a related matter, the ALGEMEEN DAGBLAD praises the Dutch finance minister and the president of the Dutch national bank for criticizing Germany and France for their failure to comply with the Stability Pact among countries using the euro.
Startling proposals to bypass national vetoes within the IGC seem to be included among measures reported upon in this item from EU Politix IGC considers ‘passerelle’ to future EU.
A 'passerelle' is most directly translated into English as a footbridge or gangway, most notably of late being the one that collapsed last weekend on the new liner Queen Mary 2, killing some sixteen people. I wondered aloud to my wife when first hearing the report whether the curse that Cunard Officers ascribed to the original Mary might have been revived!
As clearly highlighted at the end of the linked article, any such footbridge or shortcut to agreement on the IGC will be unconstitutional in every member state and mostly weel beyond ministers executive authority!
The EU leaders willingness to flirt with illegaility and unconstitutional methods to force through a constitution against all proper procedures and common practice is a rapidly growing disgrace:
Changes to treaty revision have seen concerns that national governments via representation at councils of ministers will be given “carte blanche” to make political decisions without clear democratic accountability via parliaments.
On policy areas, Part III of a new constitution, the IGC is considering a “passerelle” or “escalator” clause allowing the extension of the EU's remit by the unanimous decision ministers.
It's 'peace' psychosis in a nut's hell is the title of Mark Steyn's Opinion Column in this mornings "For Sale Daily Telegraph" Some of my favourite snippets:-
'Well, Saddam's gone, on the run with no Grecian 2000 and all out of Quality Street'
'There's "no connection" between Saddam and al-Qa'eda, because radical Islamists would never make common cause with secular Ba'athists. Or so we're told by pro-gay, pro-feminist Eurolefties who thus make common cause with honour-killing, sodomite-beheading Islamists, apparently crediting Saddam with a greater degree of intellectual coherence than they credit themselves.'
'The fanatical Muslims despise America because it's all lapdancing and gay porn; the secular Europeans despise America because it's all born-again Christians hung up on abortion; the anti-Semites despise America because it's controlled by Jews. Too Jewish, too Christian, too Godless, America is also too isolationist, except when it's too imperialist.'
The level of EU misgovernment, corruption, fraud, incompetence, negligence, economic decline is surely beginning to reach levels where ordinary members of the public should begin to take notice. This latest Ambrose Evans-Pritchard article makes scary reason if not feeling the effects of some kind of substance abuse. EU auditors blast budget failings:
The European Court of Auditors refused to certify EU accounts for the ninth successive year, saying Brussels has failed to match reform rhetoric with a genuine change of culture.
Nine Years!!!!!!! Is it not time to Clean it Up or Shut it Down!
Last evening we posted on the subject of the ill-defined and presently illegally constituted 'Defence Agency'.
According to this EU Politix report titled Green light for EU arms agency it is Britain, presumably trying to show Blair's serious 'good european credentials' that is leading the pursuit to a new bureaucratic encumbrance:
Announcing the plan, UK Defence Minister Geoff Hoon said the agency would help Europe to meet the so-called ‘Helsinki headline goal’ of creating a 60,000-strong rapid reaction force by the end of 2003.
Work on the Helsinki goal must be completed “so Europe can do more than the smallest and least demanding operations,” he argued.
Responding to accusations that American defence companies could lose out to their European counterparts in meeting the EU’s capability needs, Hoon denied that Europe’s latest move was “protectionist.”
“Obviously if we can develop appropriate European solutions to fill the gaps in those capabilities then it is right and proper to assist our industry and our people,” he said, but added, “there should not be an automatic assumption that it will be a European solution.”
The agency’s task of highlighting Europe’s defence shortfalls is likely to fuel UK resistance to attempts by some EU member states to set up autonomous European military planning headquarters.
Note the last sentence of the section we quote, it is gobbldegook. The slippery and sly Defence Minister (any man with the slightest grain of decency would long since have resigned over the relevations of the Hutton Enquiry) follows his PM's lead in trying to represent the Government's position as all things to all allies at the ultimate expense of their own credibility, but far more gravely in my view, the cost of their nation's defence.
This EU Business report on the above agency, first recently discussed in the post immediately beneath this, appears to have no existing legal basis for its establishment; hence the vagueness, we presume, regarding its remit.
Javier Solana, most notable of late for his ridiculous statement that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapons programme, has stated "You should not think of the agency as something in competition .. to NATO," the report continues:
Specifically the EU ministers agreed to launch work on the financial, legal and administrative aspects of the agency, which Solana wants to be up and running by summer 2004.
"As future head of the defence agency, .. I will do my best to give (it) a strong profile in terms of efficiency, competence and results of its work," he said.
The agency was proposed as part of a draft EU constitution agreed in June, which is now the basis of the constitutional talks being held between EU governments.
The EU is operating so far beyond any kind of controls, that it now feels capable of issuing Press Release flaunting the facts that its actions have yet to be granted any kind of national, let alone 'international' approval!
Where is Pat Cox President of the European Parliament while all this is going on...in England of course lecturing British Businessmen at the CBI about becoming better Europeans.
We believe the agency talked about in this report is a kind of 'Defence Procurement Agency' which we presume is intended to ensure standardisation of equipment across the EU. If run as badly as all else within its compass, it will thus no doubt result in nothing working at great expense.
Such an agency is bad enough news but worse, in the form of some EU Defence Headquarters could, of course, be still to come.
Blairs commitment to this agency was trailered in his Cardiff Speechjust over one year ago on 28th November 2002, he said:
I am ambitious for European defence. I do not want to limit Europe's security ambitions to low level peacekeeping. We need to resolve the outstanding issues on ESDP; and we are woefully short of the necessary defence capabilities - and it is that widening gap in capabilities that is the central issue Europe must address.
Again we need more Europe, not less. We need new decision making methods to get better value for money out of European defence budgets: strong peer review mechanisms; a European Defence Capability Development Agency, responsible to and run by the Member States, charged with identifying how capability gaps need to be filled and taking forward procurement projects to fill them; and further moves towards more open defence procurement to save on costly national protectionism
These are not the words and actions of a man who sells out the basic security interests of his country on a whim over lunch in Berlin. This is a long carefully thought through startegy, though with what aim in view we cannot of course yet be sure.
Note the change in recent terminology, a year ago it was a 'European Defence Capability Development Agency more recently it has been described as a Defence Procurement Agency, sounding merely as if it will be standardising bullets and spares. We will wait with interest to see if its creation is even mentioned by the British Media and how it is named and described! (EUobserver for one seems not too sure).
This is a quote from a longer item in today's The Times:
BRITISH oil industry leaders have requested an urgent meeting with Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, over mounting fears that the proposed European constitution will hand over control of Britain¹s North Sea oil to bureaucrats in Brussels.
The Oil and Gas Industry Leadership team has written to Mr Straw after a meeting of officials in Brussels last week failed to water down a clause in the draft constitution that could give Brussels large powers over the UK's oil and gas reserves.
The oil industry fears that the Government has failed to recognise the dangers in the Energy Chapter, which was inserted late into the draft constitution.
Meantime the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, which should be protecting the nation's vital assets sends its Europe Minister Dr Macshane to Berlin to make fatuous 'motherhood' speeches of which the following is a brief excruciating extract from much more of the same:
BUILDING A NEW EUROPE
'The time has come to build a new Europe', Foreign Office Minister Denis MacShane said at the beginning of a speech to the BMW European Forum in Berlin on 15 November. Dr MacShane outlined the challenges facing the new Europe, which include the need to increase its economic strength, to become the 'locus of the world's knowledge revolution' and a leader in scientific research, and to strengthen its relationship with the United States. 'The two great regions of the democracy and rule of law in the world must act as partners', he stressed, adding 'a safer, fairer world will not be built without or against the United States.' Dr MacShane concluded that the aim for all Europeans 'is to build a continent of peace and prosperity, of rule of law and social justice, of cooperating internationally under enforceable rules. It is to show by example and self-discipline and tolerance that different nations, religions, culture, ethnicities and beliefs can co-exist rather than hope for national or religious or ideological supremacy.'
The whole vomit inducing load of rubbish can be read here
The risk of Blair selling out Britain's steadfast commitment to Nato still remains the most clear and present danger. No mention of this crucial matter was made in the PM's speech to the CBI today, but we understand the matter will be raised by Bush during his visit. The French Defence Minister is reported in EU Business in an article titled France insists EU defence plans not against NATO as not wishing to undermine Nato. This is patent rubbish as all must recall that denigrating Nato has seemed the main plank of French foreign policy since De Gaulle unceremoniously booted the organisation out of Paris many years ago.
Now the French seek to pretend that a new EU Headquarters for some two or three score of staff will be insignificant. Britain's increasingly devious and overly ambitious Prime Minister seems ready to accept this pantomine.
We will watch this week's movements with interest.
The EU's Midday Express Press Release today highlights two critical areas of the Union's dreadful economic performance. In unemployment it reports rates between 2,0% et 29,3% in the EU in 2002, lowlights:
The 2 per cent figure is in one region of the Tyrol while the 29.3 figure was on the French Indian Ocean island of Reuinion, which most people do not even know exists. These statistics are presented on a regional basis, of which there are 211 in the existing EU and a further 40 in the applicant countries. This fact further demonstartes the EU intention of destroying the original Nation States if the people continue to sleep and so permit. Extracting the national figures is intentionally time consuming and can be done from this link:
The industrial production figures are more realistically presented. For the Euro Zone, sesaonally adjusted, fell by 0,6% in September 2003 compared to August 2003 according to Eurostat. Industrial Production fell by 0,7% in August 2003, after a rise of 1,0% in July 2003.
Production for the EU15 equally fell by 0,4% in September 2003, after a fall of 0,7% in August and a rise of 0,6% in July. In September 2003, compared to Septembre 2002, industrial production grew by 1,8% in the euro zone and by 1,5% in the EU15.
Beleaguered Hollinger International chief Conrad Black, owner of the Daily Telegraph, dramatically agreed to resign this morning along with other top executives after admitting to receiving secret payments. Read it here from The Guardian
Will this affect the recent decline in the paper's output since the resignation of Charles Moore?
European Parliament President to attack Brown' Euroscepticism
According to the Deputy Political Editor of The IndependentPaul Waugh the CBI are to witness something of a spat:
Gordon Brown will today be accused by the President of the European Parliament of pandering to Eurosceptics for "short-term tactical and personal reasons".
The trailered speech in the article seems quite strong, we will report on what is atually said when available, together with Brown's response tomorrow which the paper says will include this statement:
<"Europe's economic future depends on an ever-deeper and closer economic relationship with the US"/strong>
The most interesting highlights were this quote Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt said after meeting Berlusconi that his government was preparing a “counterattack” to forestall the draft text being “unravelled”. and its labelling of the Franco/Germany merger plan as 'extraordinary'
Also on Tuesday the Foreign Ministers will discuss the Constitution and the proposed Foreign Minister's role, Prodi will be enmeshed in talks on Fraud and the Commission will be considering actions against Germany for its excessive deficits.
George Bush of course will be staying with the Queen at Buckingham Palace, the first US President to do so since Woodrow Wilson.
These worrying two paragraphs appeared at the end of an Independent article yesterday:
The Prime Minister is likely to reassure Mr Bush that the vision promoted by Britain, France and Germany of a joint European defence force would not undermine the effectiveness of Nato alliance.
The President has said he trusts "Tony" on the subject, and European governments will be looking to Mr Bush to make conciliatory noises on the issue in his keynote speech on Wednesday.
One of the earliest posts on this blog, and a major inspiration for its start-up was this statement by Michael Rivero founder of the website whatreallyhappened.com:
'Most people prefer to believe that their leaders are just and fair, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of corrupt Government risks harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker, but only to give the moral cowards an excuse to think nothing at all.'
In recent weeks the emphasis of the postings on this blog has increasingly concentrated on the EU and the proposed Constitution that will substantially increase that organisation's powers over hundreds of millions of people misfortunate enough to be now living within Europe. The proven corruption of this body and total lack of any democratic accountability proposed in the Constitutional Treaty, makes the original quote by Michael Rivero ever more apposite. We therefore now reproduce another (from the same thinker on the same dangers) from an interview with him in 'Bankindex', that can be read in full from this link:
To know the government is corrupt and to do nothing is to surrender ones self-image of having the courage it takes to stand up for freedom and justice. Many people do not want to know that about themselves, so they refuse to look too deeply at current events because they are afraid of what they may learn, not about the government, but about themselves. Most propaganda is not designed to survive careful analysis but only to give the majority of people an excuse not to look any further or think any more about what is going on.
Those wishing to confront the facts regarding the erosion of their remaining liberties and democratic rights to the transnational, non-democratic and corrupt European Union are invited to return to this blog for regularly updated facts
Much press comment in the UK over the fact that wives will no longer be entitled to half their husbands assets on divorce if the legal changes permitted under the draft convention document are passed. More bad news for the Blair Government with similar reports that Britain's liberal inheritance laws could be affected by the Constitution was also reported yesterday. An Englishman's right to cut whoever he wishes from his last will and testament is not lightly to be withdrawn!
Elsewhere Rupert Murdoch, powerful media figure (also) within Britain, having won his battle to put his son in charge of BskyB the controlling company for the Sky Satellite Television Channels, restated his strong opposition to the EU Constitution. Newspapers controlled by the Murdoch interests The Sun, The Times and The News of the World
EU Business closed the week with several bulletins of interest Ireland has announced the theme of its Presidency starting 1st January will be for improving Transatlantic Realations, Germany and France wish to emphasise passing the convention document as little changed as possible (the German spokesman reluctant to discuss any Franco/German Union; Belgium underlines commitment to EU defence initiative and on defence the EU weapons agency moves a step closer hastening the day of effective European total defencelessness.
(When one considers how much EU officials have been able to cream off from a simple statistics agency, the pickings from a weapons agency responsible for pan-European weaponry procurement will be mind blowing, even before a single bullet is bought!)
Third Quarter estimated GDP growth for the EU fifteen countries has been announced at 0.4 per cent, this compares to the near 20 year record of 7.2 per cent in the USA. Separate figures for the unfortunate countries locked within the single currency Eurozone were not provided by the Commission in today's Press Release.
It is the stuff of science fiction and bioethical debates: The creation of artificial life. Up until now, it's largely been just that.
But an important technical bridge towards the creation of such life was crossed Thursday when genomics pioneer Craig Venter announced that his research group created an artificial virus based on a real one in just two weeks' time
Le Figaro reports today on the latest French Offer on the Executive Life scandal. Channel News Asia provides a good English summary in this report French Counter Offer which concludes with the following paragraph:
Prosecutors in the US Attorney's office, which is in possession of a sealed criminal indictment against Credit Lyonnais that could be unsealed if a deal is not reached, triggering a trial, declined to comment.
The extended limit for any agreement is 24th November, at least there is no clash with the following day deadline for France to present its deficit reduction proposals under the Growth and Stability pact!
US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, is set to discuss the above sensitive topic with EU members next Tuesday according to this report from EUobserver which includes the following paragraph:
Also, although Berlin and Paris have publicly dropped plans for a separate military headquarters to be set up in Tervuren (a Brussels suburb), Mr Blair has not ruled out that an operational headquarters would be needed to be able to carry out missions.
It is quite extraordinary that, assuming this report is true, the British Prime Minister now appears the greatest threat to to our nation's defence, which can only realistically be achieved by allowing no weakening of the Nato Alliance whatsoever.
Jack Staw welcomes Royal Assent for the The European Union (Accessions) Act 2003 according to the Foreign Office the new Act implements in UK law the requirements of the EU Accession Treaty, signed in Athens on 16 April 2003, and provides a power to open up the UK labour market to workers who are citizens of the new Member States in central and eastern Europe.
Not many other existing EU countries have lodged the intruments of ratification, and the suspicion remains in my mind that certain of them might delay such ratification as a means of applying pressure on certain of the newcomers in the event of continuing deadlock within the ongoing IGC.
EU enlargement will not be accomplished until all existing EU countries have ratified the Accession Treaty, we understand the ten accession countries have all duly signed up for membership. Britain's ever deeper descent into the morass is once again now only preventible by the actions of others. Thus does the tragedy unfold!
One note of hope, some of the newer entants seem prepeared to more stoutly defend their new-found democracies than our present leaders. The percentage of those in the EU who believe in individual liberties and defence via Nato, will at least seem to be going to increase.
Following the reports in the increasingly sensationalist 'Daily Telegraph' of today regarding a "Franco/German Union" supposedly designed to confront the USA and force through the Convention version of the Constitution, this considered report on the growing transatlantic rift from 'The Daily Star' in Bangladesh (which can be read in full from the link below) concludes as follows:
"Many consider this new development is bound to create new cracks in the EU-US relations, despite the recent compromise on Iraq issue in the Security Council. It is really difficult to predict where this game of out-witting each other will end up. The new scenario, looming large on the horizon is ominous. Now the question is: will it ultimately lead to the creation of another volatile situation for a new phase of another, or rather, second 'cold war' period between the two blocs, one led by new Europe and another by the seasoned world power, America? Only time will show what is lotted for the peace-loving peoples of the world."
Government begins to twig Peter Hain's incompetence
We thank Christina Speight's Media Report for bringing these items from the Vote 2004 bulletin to our attention:-
From Vote 2004 bulletin 6-12/11/03
DTI leak shows Government concern over Constitution "energy chapter"
A document leaked from the Department of Trade and Industry to the Telegraph this week expresses fears that the UK could lose control of North Sea Oil and resulting tax revenues of £5 billion under the European Constitution.
The DTI report warns that the proposals could "threaten Britain's controlover oil licences, the tax regime for exploration and development, pipelines, treaties and strategic stocks, which can be used to modulate prices."
However, the Foreign Office said that the transfer of energy competence to the EU was "basically OK" apart from some "second order concerns" (7November). But former Work and Pensions Minister Nick Brown also expressed concern about the plans. He said "the issuing of oil licences and the British oil field is for Britain, not the EU (Sun, 12 November).
Also this week, oil industry leaders called for a referendum on the Constitution. Sir Peter Walters and Sir John Jennings, former Chairmen of BP and Shell, called for a referendum in a letter in the Telegraph. They wrote that, "good or bad, the Constitution proposes sweeping institutional change for the EU... the proposal on energy is just one example," and that "the Constitution's likely impact on so many other areas of national and European affairs makes a wide ranging public debate essential. That is why we are backing Vote 2004's call for a referendum" (12 December).
=========
Treasury scrutinises draft Constitution
According to a report in the Sunday Times, Treasury officials have been through the draft Constitution line by line and proposed a number of changes. A Treasury source was also critical of Peter Hain's handling of the negotiations so far. He said, "The language is such that it leaves open plenty of opportunities for people to reinterpret it in four or five years' time and that has to be closed off. After all, they tried to get us to put VAT on children's clothing because of something that was in a treaty more than 30 years ago" (9 November).
More dissent! Méndez de Vigo quits IGC is the headline from this EUpolitix report linked from here. A quote:
Méndez de Vigo led a delegation of 16 MEPs to the European Convention – comprised of national parliaments, governments and EU institutions - that drew up the current text under discussion at an Inter-Governmental Conference.
But the senior MEP has pulled out of the negotiations because he believes national capitals are “antagonistic” to the proposed constitution.
Méndez de Vigo’s move is an indication of growing dismay – and anger – over the IGC’s willingness to rewrite a draft that gave the European Parliament extra powers.
joblessness in the eurozone's biggest economy was expected to increase with the number of people out of work set to average 4.38 million or 10.5 percent of the working population this year and then rise to 4.40 million and 10.6 percent in 2004, the experts predicted.
Meantime in the UK jobless figures continue to fall, this quote from a report in BusinessWorld:
The number of people claiming unemployment benefits in the UK fell for the fifth straight month in September, according to figures published this morning. The UK claimant count fell 3,300 to 926,900 in October following a decline of 6,900 in August, the Office of National Statistics (NS) said. The decline kept the jobless rate at 3.0pc, the lowest since 1975.
Britain's PM, Blair, is reported to still believe his country should join the Euro, is he completely Bonkers or just obsessed with being a future EU President? The figures seem to speak for themselves!
The ex-Head of Elf, the French state owned oil giant, between 1989 and 1993, Loïk Le Floch-Prigent, has just been jailed for five years and fined for corruption.
When France unjustly claimed George W. was invading Iraq mainly for the oil, (a charge made to look even more absurd now that Congress has passed an eighty seven billion dollar aid package) were they judging the Americans by their own oil industries' standards one wonders?
Statement by President Prodi on the attack in Nasiriya
Our earlier post regarding President Prodi and Iraq, was purely intended as criticism of EU policy and his part therin as Commission President. We realise that as an Italian, he naturally shares the grief of all his countrymen at today's loss and reproduce below his statement as issued by the EU Commission:
The news of the attack against the Carabinieri Command Centre in Nasiriya has profoundly saddened me. I wish to express my deep solidarity and my heartfelt sympathy to the families of the victims, to the Italian Government and to the Carabinieri Corps, whose sacrifices and extraordinary abnegation have contributed so much to creating the best conditions for maintaining peace and protecting the defenceless civilian population in exceptionally difficult circumstances, wherever they have been engaged throughout the world. I share deeply in the whole country's mourning.
From today's EU Midday Express, some good news for once:
Cross-border shopping : Commission asks Spain and the United Kingdom for information over travellers' rights to bring home alcohol and tobacco
In the case of the United Kingdom, the request concerns the UK policy of seizing goods even for minor offences and follows on two earlier letters (see IP/01/1482 and IP/02/1320). The Commission is concerned that these sanctions may be disproportionate to the gravity of the offence and be an obstacle to the free movement of excise goods in the Internal Market. Both requests take the form of 'letters of formal notice' under the infringement procedures laid down in Article 226 of the EC Treaty. The UK and Spain are asked to reply within two months.
As the UK and their heavy-handed and law breaking Customs have apparently managed to take no notice of two earlier letters, one wonders at the point in sending a third, paricularly when granting two months for the reply!
There will much debate in the coming days over the State visit of President George W Bush. The following are the concluding paragraphs to an Opinion article from today's The Times with which this blog concurs.
In Iraq the withering support for sanctions, especially among European nations, encouraged its dictator in defiance. In Palestine the willingness of idealistic Israelis to gamble security for peace only strengthened the hand of Islamic hardliners. Among the leaders of al-Qaeda the reluctance of America to meet outrages in Somalia, Yemen or Kenya with proper fortitude only encouraged escalation.
It is immensely to President Bush's credit that he recognises weakness is more provocative than strength to those who live outside democracy's rules.
We are safer in Britain today than we were 27 months ago, thanks to him.
Of course Bush has made mistakes, on issues from global warming to steel tariffs. There may well be room to criticise much in his record. But given the people who want to occupy that space next week, it is not a place I want to go. I respect freedom too much to enjoy seeing it abused by those whose first instinct is to insult anyone who actually bothers to fight for it.
And I admire what America has done for liberty, throughout its history, too much to want to join those people who are now biting the hand that freed them.
Stop Bush? Not in my name.
If I were to mingle with the protesters next week, a question I would choose to ask would be what future would the protesters now choose for Iraq? In what way do the present attitudes and foreign policy stances of France and Germany contribute to creating any kind of peaceful solution for that country?
I have just read the sober response of the Italian President and Prime Minister to the heavy loss their country suffered today. Noble words about continuing to work to bring a decent life for the people of Iraq. Old Europe has much of which to be recently ashamed and the list grows longer with every passing day, and each new western casualty. The EU under the guidance of Prodi, Patten and Solana shares in the shame!
“By refusing to hold a referendum in the UK all Tony Blair is succeeding in doing is giving the moral high ground to those who are against the whole concept of the EU.
“It’s right to allow the people of Scotland to make the decision and have their voice heard on what is a very important step in the development of Europe.
“A referendum is also the only way, under our current constitutional arrangements, that Scotland can have a voice and can make its views known.”
Which could of course go equally well for the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland just as well.
John Maples former Conservative Minister will today use the opportunity of his 10 minute rule bill to propose a referendum on the EU Constitution according to this report from Epolitix Commons to hear new calls for EU constitution poll
It will, at the very least, be a chance to identify MP's positions on this crucial matter for the nation.
EU Business has this report on an exercise to test how things might develop in a possible EU humanitarian deployment. It wil take place from 19 to 25th November and is described as a joint crisis management exercise, involving no troops.
The EU's midday express release has three items of good news for Germany today:
A subsidy of 27 million Euros for a propylene pipeline to Cologne.
A subsidy of 40 million euros for some milk processing up to December 2004 and,
A subsidy of 90 million euros for some fish farms etc.
As EUobserver reported earlier not such good news for real space exploration European space mission cancelled for lack of funds. Such will not deter the EU Commission, who also from Midday Express announces EU space policy ready for lift-off : Commission adopts Space Action Plan a bit like some of the more recent Ariane satellite launches then?
After dithering around all weekend and nearly the entire working day of Monday, the old but new Tory leader, Michael Howard, finally presented his mini-Shadow Cabinet.
Across Europe, Countries are preparing their citizens for the most sweeping change in their Governance many will have ever seen. In spite of all the pretence to the contrary, Europe's leaders, in an act of huge subterfuge, are planning to disband their peoples democratic arrangements and substitute a transnational, totalitarian tyranny upon their citizens. The sole beneficiaries will be those currently holding positions of power at the time of the transition.
Official opposition is mostly essentially silenced, how we have yet to fully learn. In the UK an opposition party that after years of ineffectual internal wrangling was finally beginning to make a meaningful protest, has within the past two weeks been brutally, suddenly and ruthlessly neutered.
The refusal, maintained by the Howard team throughout last week, to answer straight questions regarding the EU, and reported in full on this blog, proved their intention to duck or ignore the Europe issue.
The Shadow Cabinet appointments confirm that Europe is once again to become the issue the Tories will not face.
The list of Shadow Cabinet Foreign Affairs spokespersons and appointments makes no mention of Europe. In Government the main minister promoting the new European Constitution is Denis Macshane. Reflecting his mission and responsibilities he is Minister for Europe.
This is the list as supplied by epolitix for Foreign Affairs:
Foreign Affairs
Deputy leader and shadow foreign and international development secretary: Michael Ancram.
Shadow defence secretary: Nicholas Soames.
Shadow international development secretary: John Bercow
Shadow secretary of state for trade: James Arbuthnot
The intent of the Tory Party under Howard is thus vividly illustrated. Europe is to be ignored.
Eurosceptics who were repeatedly warned of the Europhile takeover of their party in the week during which they could have mounted a challenge, cowered and cast such warnings aside.
Iain Duncan Smith, made a grand speech on Friday to the Congress for Democracy. It becomes meaningless as it was preceded by these words:-
I take this opportunity to congratulate Michael Howard very warmly on his
election, to pledge my absolute loyalty to him as my new leader and to..."
The Tory Party has re-joined the eurofederalist conspiracy which is robbing the British people of their constitutional , common law and and democratic rights. Any arguments to the contrary clearly fly in the face of all available evidence.
Eurosceptics who remain within Howard's Conservative Party might delude themselves, but they will not deceive the voters! Evidence such duplicity will no longer succeed may be found in the post below!
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard writing in today's Daily Telegraph reports trans-European lack of enthusiasm for the EU Constitution in EU constitution faces poll defeat
The EU's own summary of results, presented quite differently can be read here and the full poll results in pdf format from the link Flash EB Convention - 2nd Wave
84 per cent of Europe's Citizens want Constitution Referendum
From the EU's Midday Express Press Release comes this news of the latest Flash Eurobarometer Poll that shows the unsurprising headline figure given above. Further details from this link to the Commission Press Room
Following on from our weekend posts regarding the increasingly dodgy looking future of the single currency, EUobserver highlights the growing difficulties with this article published this morning, of an intensification of the battle between the smaller countries and France and Germany on the implementation of the euro rules.
Dutch Finance Minister Gerrit Zalm said that Paris and Berlin were in clear breach of the rules and that "this is bad for all EU citizens".
"There is a danger of interest rate hikes and inflation, which could even undermine the stability of the euro", continued Mr Zalm.
Every now and then I read a book, paper or learned treatise that asserts Monnet, Schuman, Churchill or some such coined the expression, if not the concept of a 'United States of Europe'.
I sometimes send off a correction, or post an item on a discussion fora pointing out the error, which is then forgotten or ignored.
I received a book review this morning that seems to repeat the error, though whether the fault of just the reviewer or the book itself I am unable to tell.
Th following internet link will take those interested to an article written in 1899 by the pioneering Victorian journalist, W.T. Stead. The paper was entitled Europa and can be reached by clicking on the title.
It is worth a read, but for those without the time, there follow a few quotes:
"So far, therefore, we have come in our pilgrimage to the United States of Europe..."
"This question of the United States of Europe has been one of the ideals towards which I have constantly, in fair weather and in foul, directed my course" (since 1880 - ed.)
"The conception in those days was confined to few, but nowadays the parties led by Lord Roseberry and Lord Salisbury would vie with each other in asserting their readiness to recognize the European Concert as the germ of the United States of Europe,"
Citation:W.T. Stead, The United States of Europe, Part I, ch.V, 1899
The whole piece is rich in Irony and essential for those desiring facts; not least to expose the myth upon which the EU is built.
I accept that others before may have also considered the title "United States of Europe", but this clearly puts the date to 1880 and elucidates the whole concept in considerable detail.
The original report upon which The Scotsman based its article, was predicated upon civil unrest within Germany. John Vinocur writing in the International Herald Tribune, before the setback Schroeder's reform package received in the legislature, considers this unlikely. If not in Germany, then could the spark perhaps come from France?
Events in these two countries should be closely watched. How to prepare for an unravelling of the Euro is something perhaps we should all start to consider? Held together as it is in the face of all logic and conventional economic theory, by the sole driving force of the political will of politicians who all too clearly are losing their grip. Once the realisation dawns, events could move incredibly swiftly. All it takes is one respected analalyst to declare, like the fairytale child, 'The Emperor has no Clothes!'
There appear no lengths to which the Blair Government will not go (now it appears with the active support of the Howardly led opposition) in order to avoid giving the British people a say on the EU Constitution. In this report from the Sunday Telegraph it seems British diplomats have been putting pressure on the French to avoid a referendum in anticipation they might then have to follow suit. Read the report Don't poll on EU, Britain pleads with France
An official close to Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, last night told The Telegraph that no formal request would be made to the French Government, but admitted that informal remarks might have been made between diplomats.
As reported on our sister blog Teetering Tories, at last Friday's Congress for Democracy Rally, an anti-EU campaigner from France, Phillipe de Villiers, made clear, however, the outcome of such a French referendum might not be exactly what the Transnational Progressivists might hope.
Amongst the plethora of assaults mounted against the individual liberties and common law rights of the peoples of the British Isles, which have been particularly severe under the Major and Blair administrations, (a fact aggravated by Major's frontman in that assault now laughably playing the role of Leader of the Opposition), Britain's judiciary, have if anything seen their powers and role increase and have been silent in democracy's defence.
The proposal to scrap the role of Lord Chancellor and with it his office, suddenly finds their Lordships voluble in freedom's defence. As we pointed out both on this blog and elsewhere at the time of the announcement, this move came as no surprise, having been trailered by rumblings in Brussels regarding the unsuitability of mixing judicial and executive posts. Countless other such Continentally Ordained infringements and suppressions of the customs of our land have been allowed to pass without dissent.
In today's Sunday Telegraph in an article entitled 'We mustn't let our legal system end up like our railways'In his only newspaper interview since his outspoken attack on the Government's plan to abolish the Lord Chancellor's office, Lord Woolf, the Lord Chief Justice, tells Alasdair Palmer of Mr Blair's threat to our way of life
There is a considerable body of expert legal opinion within the United Kingdom that argues that much of what has happened to our country at the hands of Brussels has in fact been contrary to British Law. The various cases and arguments must be well known to their Lordships. The reasons for their rejection remain a mystery to this observer, but if more attention had been earlier paid to the delicate fabric of our constitutional rights, I cannot help but feel, that we could have avoided reaching this point of national impotence, which from reading the article, seems to be the emotion that best describes the Lord Chief Justices' perplexity.
Where are your politics Far Left/Extreme Right/ Authoritarian/Libertarian an entertaining test to try and find out can be tried from this link to The Political Compass.
As the folly of the Euro has been a theme of this blog today, we post below part of a contribution to the Financial Times Discussion Forum this afternoon:
Quote
The High Priest Politburo Bureaucrats –Ideology and Sympathy in the Eurowreck
by Hoog #5003613 of 3531
08 Nov 2003 02:24 PM
Comrades,
For whom should we have sympathy?
Perhaps the army of discarded young unemployed people in Old Europe, living in countries where an evil coalition of baby boomer socialist politicians and evil bureaucrats have created a society of remorseless perpetual economic decline. The size of government has relentlessly risen in the eurowreck, and this has destroyed productive capacity and therefore jobs. The next generation will pay dearly for these fat slob bureaucrats in Brussels – socialists with their noses permanently in the pig trough, stealing, regulating and redistributing Old Europe towards a dire future.
Make no mistake. Times are desperate in Old Europe. The remorseless stagnation in the eurowreck will at some point degenerate into a demographic time bomb, leaving Old Europe destitute and dispirited.
These “sympathetic” bureaucrats say don’t worry that their idiotic regulations have created a massive underclass of unemployed that quite probably will never be able to get a job in their lives. These “sympathetic” bureaucrats say don’t worry that trillions of euros have been wasted over the years on farmer welfare, when this money could have been used to create something worthwhile which could have benefited all with some longevity. These “sympathetic” bureaucrats say don’t worry as they embark on yet another round of stealing. These “sympathetic” bureaucrats say don’t worry that trillions of euros have been wasted over the years on white elephant prestige projects.
Unquote
John H. Makin a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute had this article posted on the internet 1st July1997. Its concluding paragraph was as follows:
The major risk is that Europeans will achieve monetary union without rationalizing the generous program of social benefits or establishing fiscal discipline. If Europe simply declares victory by freezing its exchange rates together, without making the needed structural changes in the economy, European monetary union will not survive for very long without resorting to a highly counterproductive increase in trade protection. That outcome would constitute a tragic confusion of means and ends, with Europe bearing the major portion of the costs.
To understand how exactly Europe arrived in its present dreadful predicament, and fully understand that the Continents political elite well knew the likely consequences of their actions, not least the stagnant economies rising unemployment and goodness knows what else that now lies ahead, it is worthwhile reading the entire predictive paper from this link.
Their faces almost touching, Jacques Chirac and Helmut Kohl shouted accusations at one another while their petrified cabinet ministers watched. The argument in the corridors of a European summit meeting 16 months ago was described as reaching such dangerous proportions that one of Mr. Chirac's aides slapped him on the shoulder, telling him to stop.
That clash took place in Dublin in December 1996 when the Growth and Stability pact that is today causing both countries so much pain was first agreed.
The article then continues to describe further disputes caused in1997 by French insistence on the appointment of Jean-Claude Trichet to head the ECB part way though the term of Wim Duisenber, as was finally accomplished this past week. The article later continues:
Mr. Chirac faces the possibility of having personally created Mr. Trichet as the French candidate only to find no trace of support for him within the EU.......
For Mr. Kohl, virtually any divergence from an unconditional eight-year term for Mr. Duisenberg would mean turning his back on his own positions, the Bundesbank's and those of his ministers and the political allies of his Christian Democratic Party.....
The lack of room for compromise is underscored by the situation in the Netherlands, where Mr. Duisenberg's candidacy has become an issue of national self-esteem.
So much for aspects regarding the French appointee. Of even greater Irony at present is this final quote:-
in December 1996 after the clash described...(above - ed.), the French gave way to German insistence that the stability pact include specific performance targets and specific penalties for countries failing to achieve them. In turn, the official name of the agreement later became the Stability and Growth Pact, the reference to growth reflecting a French wish that has remained more a statement of intentions than a practical engagement
Le Figaro reports that French Prime Minister has plunged in the opinion polls by 25 points this year, 12 of them in the past three months alone. Only 33 pct of those asked now have a favourable opinion of his performance against 64 pct unfavourable. Least popular PM since 1978
Meanwhile in Germany Schroeder's reform package, on which his future seems staked, has been blocked - Deutsche Welle. The German State Broadcasters Home Page carries this item:
Germany on the Operating Table
With the slowest growth in Europe and rampant unemployment, there's no denying the German economy is sick. Scalpel in hand, Gerhard Schröder is seeking this fall to undertake the biggest overhaul of the country's social system and tax structure in 50 years.
The public bullying of their partner countries within the EU does not appear to be buying the French and German Governments even domestic success!
The following is the e-mail I sent this morning to my Conservative Member of Parliament, copied to my Conservative MEP:
As a registered elector within your constituency I had to write to express my total disgust with the Conservative Party. As a one time party member in the ---- Branch, and with strong views on individual freedoms and responsibilities I should be, and was for many years a natural Conservative voter.
I am appalled at the actions of all sitting Conservative MPs excepting only Iain Duncan Smith and (with no admiration) Michael Howard, who one cannot blame for his new found but totally misplaced ambition.
The real shame for recent events must fall on the 163 unprincipled sheep who allowed the properly chosen party leader to be thrown out on his ear, while then sitting back and permitting a small secretive cabal to impose a failed, elderly, shop-soiled candidate to be installed without offering the party at large any opportunity of choice or say.
The Conservative Party has a long history, but clearly now exists only as a hindrance to the beliefs and principles it was once supposed to represent.
While under Duncan Smith I had been contemplating a return and even active support for the Tory party, (following a very brief and unhappy dalliance with what I discovered is the completely corrupt and rotten UK Independence Party), I must now divert my efforts to ensuring the Tories never rule again.
Did Portillo quit in disgust I wonder? If not then he and the rest of you certainly should. Shame on you all.
The Pope issued a new appeal today to drafters of a European constitution to include explicit mention of the continent’s Christian roots in the document.
“A society forgetful of its past is exposed to the risk of not being able to deal with its present and – worse yet – of becoming the victim of its future,” he said in the Vatican.
According to EurActiv the Commission is barging in to the argument in support of the Franco/German position when 'Commissioner Barnier expressed criticism over the attitude of certain governments "qui veulent agir comme si la Convention n'avait jamais existé" [who want to act as if the Convention had never existed].' Iñigo Méndez de Vigo (EPP-ED, Spain), representative of the EP in the IGC, warned against taking "backward steps" in the Constitutional talks and against weakening the role of the EP in deciding on the EU budget.
In other words, refuse to allow the fully ratified Nice Treaty to be over-ridden arbutrarily by the totally non-democratic decisions taken almost entirely in accordance with the whim of disgraced ex-French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing.
While Blair got the thumbs down from the Cambridge Union it was not by a huge margin. The real surprise from this presumed politically astute group was the large number of abstentions. The report is taken from The Scotsman article headlined Cambridge Union 'Has No Confidence in Blair'
The members of the Society voted for the motion “This House Has No Confidence In Her Majesty’s Government.” by 173 votes to 167.
The 110 abstentions represent a quarter of those attending! Much to play for.
Euro costs Italian Families 2,800 euros each SO FAR
This report from Italy, appears to make no sense against the official ECB inflation statistics. Although ECB President Trichet yesterday described inflation as "sticky" in his first press conference. In Italy it seems to be consumers money sticking to shopkeepers fingers! Read the EUobserver item here.
The deadlock over votes for the EU Constotution continues with the deadlock continuing. Le Figaro endeavours to put a gloss on the matter by reprting some Spanish agreement on the concept of European Defence, but on moving Spain away from its Nice position no advance has been made.French Report.
Mr Aznar quipped at a press conference after the summit, "I love France so much that I have fallen in love with Nice".
"There was a consensus in the Nice Treaty that does not exist in the Convention . And the compromises already agreed deserve to be taken into account".
Any who recall the tactics employed by Chirac to obtain the final Nice agreement, must surely not be able to share some of the pleasure that Aznar must now be gaining in sticking to his guns.
The Daily Telegraph catches up with the much earlier report from The Sun posted here, regarding the danger the EU Constitutional Document poses to Britain's Oil Production industry. Read it here.
"Multilateralism, Transnational Progessivism, the Aqui Communitaire and Howard's Tories."
The French have chosen to label the nature of their foreign policy differences Multilateralism versus Unilateralism. In countering what they see as the threat of the latter (America making all the world?s big decisions on its own) they propose in particular a bi-polar rather than uni-polar world (in reality an EU superstate acting as a counterweight to American power, and
influence). An important tool in achieving this aim, the EU being a military pygmy alongside the US, is the United Nations.
Iraq threw these conflicting views to the front of the world stage. Following the Kuwait invasion the UN had imposed various sanctions, no-fly zones etc., upon Iraq. The burden of implementation fell mainly upon the US aided by Britain. As the years passed the suspicion formed in my mind that other major countries, while paying lip service to the UN mandated restraints, sought maximum commercial advantage from their non-involvement in the enforcement process and benefit from the latent oil wealth of Saddam?s oppressed nation.
(This may or may not have been a factor in what followed).
After 9/11 and the defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan, attention turned to Iraq where the UN arms inspectors had been withdrawn and Saddam Hussein was in growing breach of many UN resolutions. At this point the limits of multilateralism were reached. This is most easily illustrated by looking at the concept from an American viewpoint.
Transnational Progressivism was the expression coined by Jonn Fonte in a paper 'The Ideological War within the West' published a year before 9/11 and is essential reading. A summary can be read from this link:
Those without the time to visit either link can follow the reasoning of this posting with this very brief extract:
The idea of transnationalism as a major conceptual tool. Transnationalism is the next stage of multicultural ideology. Like multiculturalism, transnationalism is a concept that provides elites with both an empirical tool (a plausible analysis of what is) and an ideological framework (a vision of what should be). Transnational advocates argue that globalization requires some form of "global governance" because they believe that the nation-state and the idea of national citizenship are ill suited to deal with the global problems of the future.
AS Fonte then went on to point out in his paper, the EU is the "STRONGHOLD OF TRANSNATIONAL PROGRESSIVISM Its governmental structure is post-democratic. Power in the EU principally resides in the European Commission (EC) and to a lesser extent the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The EC, the EU's executive body, initiates legislative action, implements common policy, and controls a large bureaucracy.... It is unelected and, for the most part, unaccountable."
The lable chosen by the EU to describe this concept is not of course that coined by Fonte, but rather the concept described as 'Aqui Communitaire'. This is generally taken to mean: "whatever power is once obtained by the EU from the previously sovereign nation states it will never relinquish". As such it has now been proposed in the present IGC, as the principal guiding aim of the Constitutional Treaty absorbing and supplementing the earlier
concept of 'ever closer union'. It presumably incorporates all the concepts of 'Transnational Progressivism' as detailed in Fonte's paper.
Iraq and the UN Security Council was where the clash between liberal democracy and this newly defined concept really first occurred and where the fatalflaws of joint action are now becoming visible. The skirmishing over the ICC was a warning sign.
France and Germany had approved the various UN resolutions that gradually brought the Iraq situation to a head. They concurred with the various warnings issued by the Security Council, and were aware of the troop build-up by the USA and Britain around Iraq. Their own Generals would have advised them that such deployment necessitated a resolution of the matter, if by military means before the onset of the summer heat of 2003.
The gradual increasing of pressure on Saddam Hussein therefore had a fixed time limit. Of which it later seemed France and Germany chose to feign ignorance. Just as today the logical endpoint of their Multilateralist policy for Iraq continues to call for a UN solution, when the reality is clear to all that this organisation has neither the wherewithal, ability or desire to have anything to do with matters that require making hard choices in potentially extremely hostile environments. The UN has turned and fled following heavy and tragic casualties, unhappily many brought about by inefficiencies within its own organisation.
Yesterday in Washington President Bush spoke to the National Endowment for Democracy, and made a landmark speech setting out hugely ambitious aims for democracy across the Middle East. Having earlier signed an aid package from the USA for eighty seven and a half billion dollars in the form of grants for Iraq he shamed the Europeans in both the loftiness of America's thinking and the depths of America's pockets.
Transnational Progressivism and the cul de sac of the Aqui Communitaire stand shamed and naked. The extent of the failure of the European Union's economic experiment with the Euro, was simultaneously stunningly spelt out in the first press conference of Jean-Claude Trichet the shoehorned-in new French President of the ECB, whose early ousting of Wim Duisenberg epitomises the workings of the 'aqui communitaire' concept in practice.
Meantime Britain has been caught in the middle. Or it had been up until midday. From that moment, with the appointment of Michael Howard as leader of the Conservative opposition party it appeared Transnational Progressivism has been embraced by the last of the three main political parties within the country.
Michael Howard had earlier made much play of his intention of leading from the centre. He had indeed openly courted those with whom he had earlier been seen to have huge and fundamental disagreements over the most important policy matter of this age, namely Britain?s relationship with the anti-nation state, non-democratic and 'transnational progressivist' EU.
The BBC reported the new Tory leader to have said the following:
"We must rediscover the habit of thinking the best of each other. We must rediscover the virtues of mutual support and friendship.
Let us, in this party that vaunts its belief in personal responsibility, each resolve that we will, all of us, assume a personal responsibility for the success of our endeavour.
No bystanders. No snipers from the sidelines. Every one of us a fully engaged participant in the great battle of hearts and minds and ideas.
Because we have an extraordinary common thread that binds us all together.
We all want to see a Conservative government elected. We are all crew on what at its best is the most superb campaigning vessel politics has ever known."
Translated of course , this means, we must forget our deeply held ideological beliefs, give up all thought of proposing to do what we know is best and right for the country and merely work together in order to gain power.
Exactly what Blair did in driving New Labour to Government with no purpose other than power itself, with the ruination of the nation as its result.
Another fitting analogy would be Chamberlain with Hitler and Mussolini. Suppressing his ideological instincts to buy something that appeared more comfortable or desirable however temporary.
The extraordinary thing about the timing of this change within the Conservative Party, is that it comes at a moment when the tide is beginning to turn. Schroeder this week seemed to step back from his support of the EU defence commitment. The folly of recent French domestic policies and questioning of Foreign policy errors are all the talk of Paris.
The consensus within Europe that Howard and the Tories are belatedly rushing to embrace is cracking. 'Transnational Progressivism' and the 'Aqui Communitaire' can be beaten, and indeed the first signs it might be in retreat are only now appearing. In Britain, however, we now have no political party to take the battle forward.
The Poles quite rightly are outraged at the change in voting procedures proposed by the Convention. They represent a huge loss of comparative voting power for both the Poles and Spain.
According to this report from Radio Free Europe the Poles will fight to the end and if necessary veto the Constitution. A quote:
Polish Deputy Foreign Minister Jan Truszczinski signaled the country's position this week (on 4 November), saying Poland would like to approve the draft constitution but does not feel obligated to do so "at any price."
The EU Commissioner for Employment and Social Affairs Anna Diamantopoulou has indeed come up with a lulu of a truly dumb idea. It is to outlaw sex discrimination in access to goods and services. The new rules would prohibit the use of gender as a factor in calculating insurance premiums.
Bet you don't believe me! Read it here from this link.
According to the article in EU Business Men pay higher premiums for life insurance. The industry justifies this on the grounds that women live longer
Don't think such logical facts will make any difference to an EU Commissioner, sounds as if they haven't been 'lobbying' the lady hard enough.
The full text of the speech delivered by Michael Howard in Putney, once constituency of David Mellor another noted figure of the Major era if I remember correctly, can be found in this link from the BBC Howard's speech in full
It opens:
'Who was it who said a week is a long time in politics?
This has been a bruising period for the party.
Some hard things have been said on all sides....'
Not least, indeed by this blogger. I will now watch developments and hope that my political instinct has been very badly wrong!
Plunging weekly US jobless figures caused a fall in the euro against the dollar, as the Franco/German enforced appointee as head of the European Central Bank, Jean-Claude Trichet, opened his first news conference in the post that was so unscrupulously obtained. Unsurprisingly euro interst rates were left unchanged.
One would have to be a dreamer indeed to believe that Eurozone unemployment levels will ever reach US percentage rates during the eight long years of Trichet's rule. More chance of the euro itself not lasting the course in my view!
How can anybody at the ECB, let alone 18 in Committee members set an interest rate that is correct for all. Only by complete federalisation of course, which is clearly the Franco/German plan...as Trichet said in response to a question at 1356 GMT today 6th November 'we are already Federal'
Ever since Mr Mandelson's return, Mr Brown has bristled with barely concealed fury at the privileged position the MP for Hartlepool enjoys at the Prime Minister's side. Mr Mandelson attends the crucial Monday morning strategy meetings at 10 Downing Street and reportedly steps into the chair when Mr Blair is not there.
Sitting next to Mr Brown at Prime Minister's questions yesterday Mr Blair laughed off jibes from Iain Duncan Smith, the deposed Tory leader, about impending leadership challenges on the Labour side.
Denying any split with the Chancellor on Europe he said he agreed with Mr Brown that the draft EU constitution could lead to "tax harmonisation and a federal state".
Such is the opinion of Ambrose Evans-Pritchard writing in yesterday's Daily TelegraphBrown slams 'outdated' trade policies. The piece has this powerful conclusion:
The Government strategy has been to focus attention on the areas where the constitution strips away the veto. By this measure the text is a major change, but not a revolution.
For Eurosceptics and ardent pro-Europeans alike, the character of the Union will be so profoundly altered as it moves to a unitary entity under a supreme constitution that everything else is subsumed and transformed in the process.
Once the document is ratified, the European Court will have the sole right to decide what the ambiguous clauses mean. Can it be trusted? So far, the Court has refused all requests by this newspaper for interviews or to answer any questions on the subject.
L'Express has this headline in an article in its 'Economic Section':
Chancellor Brown bashes “rigid” Europe
Conservative.com, already seeking ways to distract attention from the Party's disastrous choice of new leader, similarly and unusually makes the Chancellor its headline news story this morning titled Brown knows EU referendum inevitable
There are now only two sitting Tory MPs within the United Kingdom worthy of re-election: those being Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Howard.
The former not having been allowed to stand against Howard and the latter who can hardly be blamed for believing in himself in spite of all the evidence and logic arguing to the contrary.
The remaining 163 will have no excuse for what will now be seen to follow.
This report from Channel News Asia has some of the better detail. For the latest report on Brown's challenge to Blair The Guardian has an 11:15 update that seems the challenge is becoming more open: Brown goes public over NEC snub
As Howard courts the Tory euro-federalists' blessing on his leadership and refuses to commit to withdrawing from the Constitutional Treaty should Blair sign on as he clearly plans, hope of progress against the ever encroaching EU must find a new home. This article in today's Guardian indicates that the battle may initially be taken forward by the Chancellor of the Exchequer Brown's salvos reopen rift with prime minister
Read more about the Howard bid in the post immediately below.
I feel compelled to respond. Dr Gabb makes the following statement:
Whatever the case, though, Mr Howard will have to do. And so, when he sits high on his throne of royal state, I too will bow down before him and givenot Heaven for lost.Unquote
Michael Howard will not have to do. In fact he will not do at all. I will not bow down before him ever. Howard is fatally flawed; even before assuming the Leadership, half the people in the country find him untrustworthy.
When they watch the Jeremy Paxman interview again, which is available 24/24 on the internet (within minutes on broadband the use of which is spreading fast), and the Private Eye 'lying to parliament' material, it is obvious that he is holed beneath the waterline. Those promoting him are either blind or duplicitous.
If Dr Gabb believes all he states, then he is indeed, on this occasion, being a hopeless romantic.
He is ahead of himself in his analogy. Far more similarity exists between Blair and Shaftesbury, with Howard hoping to play the role of Charles II.
In a few hours if there is not one single truly eurorealist Conservative MP prepared to step forward, then that ancient party is doomed, and the country condemned to years more oppression from Europe, with no prospect of a second glorious revolution anywhere in sight.
We must hope that today one Tory MP, will stop "letting 'I dare not' wait upon 'I would' and "screwing his courage to the sticking place" will do what must be done.
John Redwood, who challenged Major in July 1995, proving he is one of the few members of the party who recognises where the interests of the country truly lie, would be my favoured choice. At this late stage, however, ANY eurorealist would do!
Wake-up Libertarians, Tories , eurorealists, patriots, indeed any who care for decency, honesty and some set of minimum standards in public life. The Conservatives are falling to conspirators and euro-federalists! The greatest beneficiaries of a Howard takeover will be the Lib-Dems and New Labour! (And smug satisfaction for the likes of Clarke,Taylor and Portillo).
The Minister for Europe has had his Department issue details of his speech of last night regarding the EU. Coming as it does from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office whose Secretary of State sticks with the clear fiction that the EU Constitutional Treaty is a simple tidying up exercise, as loudly and clearly contradicted, also last evening. by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, it can be sure to be hardly worth close reading. We include the link for those still fond of fairy tales and as a possible future reference source.
The one and only area the European consumer was supposed to benefit from the single currency, as should have been predicted, is of no benefit "at all" according to this report from EUobserver.
So as well as the economic stagnation, rising unemployment, massive price gouging etc. etc., the poor consumer does not even save on transfer costs, just consider the opening example of the piece:
If a Finn goes into his bank in Helsinki to transfer 40 euro to a friend in Brussels, he or she has to pay an astonishing 28.59 euro - or 71.5 percent of the original amount.
Financial reality seems to have sunk in on Schroeder. If this report from EU Business turns out to be fully confirmed, it will be an enormous relief for the treacherous Blair who was in a huge hole of his own making on this matter. A quote from the link:-
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder expressed support Wednesday for a European Union defence structure but said that it should be built within NATO and not double up on tasks carried out by the alliance.
The EU must be able to act "in terms of foreign and security policies, and that could and must happen within the transatlantic alliance," he told a European forum in Berlin.
If Blair's bacon has been saved with the Americans from this announcement, then it is probably due to the growing financial crisis in Euroland.
Some superstate that cannot afford to defend itself!
Franco/German pressure on Spain to be resumed in Carcassonne
EU Business reports that Chirac and Raffarin will meet with Aznar in the fairytale surroundings of Carcassonne on Thursday. There the pressure on Spain to give up the favourable voting wieghts that it won at Nice, together with Poland, will be resumed, Schroeder having again failed as reported here yesterday.
Although no agreement is expected on any of the main differences between the two countries on the EU Constitution within the IGC, as is nowadays increasingly becoming the norm, agreement is already assured in an area designed to consolidate the authoritarian and non-democratic nature of the ever more totalitarian conglomerstate, we quote the final paragraph:
On the bilateral front, Aznar and Chirac are due to sign in Carcassonne an agreement that will create common police investigation units, as part of a stepped-up fight against cross-border crime.
Geoff Hoon, (still British Defence Secretary) has ruled out participation in the Tervuren command post apparently still being planned for the European Defence Force according to this report from EU Business
By clicking this this link you will find, towards the end of the BBC page that then opens, a video link on which it is possible to watch the 13th May 1997 Jeremy Paxman, 'Newsnight' interview of Michael Howard, where the latter famously refused to answer a straightforward question 14 times.
The interview gives clear evidence why Conservative MPs then thought this man unsuitable to be leader of their party. He came bottom of the subsequent poll.
It also clearly explains why even to this day only half the people in the country would trust him.
What it does not explain, of course, is why there is not apparently one single Tory MP with enough respect for their party or country to have the courage to supply them with an alternative to this sure fire loser.
These are quotes from a BBC News report in November 2002, linked here.
'I'll never stand for leadership'
"But I have no interest or desire in becoming leader of the Conservative Party, because we have an excellent leader in Iain Duncan Smith, whom I wholeheartedly support."
Is the shadow chancellor ruling himself out in a David Davis sense ("I will never stand against Iain"), or in a Michael Portillo way ("I never want the job")?
"I will never stand again for the leadership of the Conservative Party," Mr Howard unhesitatingly replies.
So he rules himself out completely, whatever the circumstances? "That's right."
No wonder half the country do not trust him!
These are some of the directorships he has pledged to give up if annointed:-
Eschmann Holdings Limited (medical supplies manufacturer Chairman George Kennedy), the Imprint Group (specialist printer Chairman George Kennedy) Finex plc (PR company), Crime Reduction International Limited and is a member of the Advisory Council of Gas and Oil company Consort Resources Limited (chaired by ex Tory Minister Lord Moynihan)
Private Eye seems to think he might have done so according to these reports from December 1994 and February 1995 which can be read in full from this link:-
In an answer to the Leyton MP Harry Cohen (dated 19 January this year) Howard declares that “the Home Office did not make any staff redundant; subsequent redundancies by Sema Group are a matter for the company”. Sema Group made it clear, he continues, that the number of staff required would be dependent on an “operational review.”
Howard’s use of the word subsequent is odd. For Sema had already completed their review in September last year, and knew exactly how many staff it wanted to keep. So did ED5, and so did everyone else, it seems, except the Home Secretary himself.
Howard is also coy about the size of the ‘transitionary payment’ (from the taxpayer) covering the redundancies. He can’t wouldn’t reveal its size he says because “the precise details are commercial in confidence.”
The Home Office still insists that the deal works out cheaper in the long run. But embarrassingly, the newowners Sema Group have already sub-contracted some of the work to a third party, helping themselves to a profit.
New Statesman, April 1995:
The Home Secretary Michael Howard has been accused of misleading parliament over the £50m privatisation of a Home Office computer department.
As trailered in our posting here at lunchtime yesterday, Gordon Brown is taking up the cudgels against the EU Constitution in so far as it robs our nation of its economic independence, just as it takes it in every other area of national life. This is the final paragraph of the leading article of the Daily Telegraph expounding on that subject this morning:-
This brings us to Mr Brown's ulterior purpose in attacking fiscal federalism. His duel with the Prime Minister, which reached new heights at the Labour conference in Bournemouth, can only end with the political demise of one or the other. Mr Brown seems to be calculating that Mr Blair's refusal to concede a referendum on the European constitution could be his electoral Achilles' heel. If the constitution matters as much as Mr Brown now says it does, why is Mr Blair refusing to give the country a vote on it?
The Mori Poll commissioned by and published in The Independent yesterday is quoted in this article on Michael Portillo in today's TelegraphPortillo is tipped for return to front line by Toby Helm, Chief Political Correspondent.
It quotes: "A frontbencher from the Right said: "It would be a brilliant idea." Which, if true, provides proof positive, as if more were needed, of the total loss of any contact with the real world now on display from that section of the party.
As the Tory's House Journal has decided to include mention of the Mori Poll and provide a link it is worth another look at what your typical Tory MP will be reading this morning that most of us had fully absorbed yesterday:
There's no "bounce" yet evident in the public's voting intention for the Conservative Party after the Tory MPs' choice of Michael Howard as the Leader of the Party.
All the tables look disastrous for the Tories with them losing 3 points to the Liberal Democrats since Howard's appearance. The sole area where he seems to be an improvement over IDS in the public's eyes (naturally seized upon by the totally biased and probably complicit Telegraph) is in his readiness to be PM with 30 pct agreeing (vs 16 for IDS) and 48 disagreeing (67 for IDS)
Being ready to be PM in the publics eyes is one thing, getting to be PM is, of course quite another. In these increasingly presidential campaign style days of General Elections "Trust is generally considered a key.
On trustworthiness the true disaster of the Tories rush to crown Howard becomes clear. In June 2003 48 per cent of the public found IDS trustworthy against 36 who did not and 16 per cent who did not know.
Michael Howard, even before he has really started to get grilled about his past record, scores as follows:
Trustworthy.....41 per cent Not Trustworthy.....49 per cent Don't Know 10pct
The Tories are about to APPOINT as Leader a Candidate, who, before he even assumes office is distrusted by half the electorate.
Now is that LUNACY? If not, then it most certainly is Electoral Suicide! The question, of course, is WHY?
The Blair Government's obsession with appearances rather than substance in the Constitutional negotiations, earlier demonstrated by the huge emphasis on removing the word 'federal' while all the provisions cleary create a Federation, are again highlighted in this report from EU Observer regarding flags, anthems and other symbols of the totalitarian superstate in which we are all condemned to soon have to live:
EU symbols tucked away
Progress is slow and the group, known by its Chair's name Pyrus, cannot take a decision unless all 25 member states agree.
If there is one dissenting voice within the group, the draft Constitution stays as it is.
This is why the article on EU symbols, the flag, anthem, Europe Day, will remain tucked away in part IV.
The UK refused to allow the article to be moved to the first articles of the Constitution fearing the political consequences.
If only our government similarly feared the destruction of our democracy, common law rights, etc. one half so much, then they might start negotaiting some things of substance!
I stop by the FT Fora every now and then to have a go against the EU on whatever forum seems most appropriate at the time. Never before have I seen a discussion suddenly and arbtirarily shut down. Up to now that is!
The Conservative Party Fora that was admittedly straying somewhat off topic (a frequent occurrence normally tolerated) having also wandered towards conspiracy theories regarding Howard's strange coronation has been suddenly closed without a replacement. We reproduce one of the last postings to illustrate the normal innocenec of contributions:-
Tory leader
by Henry Curteis #8001394 of 1338
03 Nov 2003 06:45 AM
Howard is a stitch-up leader. No Tory worth his salt can be happy when all the newspapers, TV stations, politicians of all parties start claiming in unison that Howard is the best thing since sliced bread (including Labour chipping in that they really fear Howard).
The truth is that they really feared IDS as he was connecting with people from all parties. Those that liked him saw him as a normal person not from the glamour world of media and manipulation. Howard is easy meat for Labour - the poll tax man. It's all a big stitch up.
Some one must bust this thing wide open, and who better than Theresa May. She has survived the IDS leadership an great shape through appallingly difficult circumstances. She has been 100% loyal to Iain and deserves her reward.
She must throw her hat into the ring ang go for it. The media must not be allowed to bury British democracy, and organise a stitch-up. The Conservative Party members must have their say. Go for it Theresa! They'll love you. They won't love grinning Howard. He loves himslef too much.
I do not necessarily agree with the contributor about Theresa May, but I do about the stitch-up and on that basis any other contender would now probably receive my support.
This report on the Ecofin meeting states that Germany will be the next EU country to face scrutiny by the European Commission. After the spectacular avoidance by France of any penalties for its three year running pact breaking deficits, ably aided by German support of course, this prospect must seem less than terrifying.
According to the FT Gordon Brown was to use the Ecofin meeting to push for clarity in the EU Constitution on economic matters. Why one wonders, should that area, admittedly one of crucial importance, become an exception to the rest of the document. Reports of whether Brown met with sucess or failure have yet to arrive Read the FT article here.
In an article by the Telegraph's Political Editor, George Jones titled I've changed and the party must too, says Howard the biggest question facing the country today, namely the EU Constitution gets not one mention. Nor in fact does the entire matter of the European Union get a single word.
The biggest sell out seen for years is presently underway and nobody is saying a word. At least the title of the article is correct....Howard has changed! He is now apparently supporting the complete absorbtion of this nation into the apparatus and controls of the European Continental powers without a single word of protest.
The new Tory leadership may go through the motions of demanding a referendum on the constitution but who will believe them when Howard climbed to power with the Tory Eurofederalists providing the essential last push up the greasy pole.
The Independent meanwhile has this article 'A new leader - but no sign of a bounce for the Tories' By Bob Worcester it reports:-
The findings will be a huge disappointment to Tory MPs, who hoped their decision to rally overwhelmingly behind the shadow Chancellor after they ousted Mr Duncan Smith last week would revive the party's flagging fortunes.
Ironies does not believe this can be true. Were the Tory MPs capable of analysis of any kind they would have known that would be exactly the result, just as predicted on this blog from the moment of Howard's first mention as a front runner.
Were they capable of feeling emotion then they should still be too eaten up with guilt at first having knifed IDS, then stupidity at having rushed to crown such an obviously unsuitable successor. Hopefully the 'instinct' for self-survival might kick in sometime during the remaining 44 hours and a genuinely eurorealistic contender who is aware of the danger posed by the EU might step forth!
Another article from the same paper reports ' Voters trust Duncan Smith far more than his likely successor' Andrew Grice, the Political Editor. He reports:
The Tories may do even worse in a general election with Michael Howard as their leader than they would with Iain Duncan Smith, according to a MORI poll for The Independent.
Mr Howard is also perceived as less trustworthy than Mr Duncan Smith, who he is expected to replace without challenge when nominations close on Thursday.
A week ago one might thought one had been pitched into Bedlam reading such stuff, but now we must take it in our stride. Not only that apparently but also accept with such facts blandly stated that still at tea-time of the day when readers could have read this with their breakfasts..... STILL no other candidate has come forward.
The headline story from German State Broadcaster on their website, at the moment, which can be visited from this link; has the following headline and opening paragraph:
Germany Questions Legality of Iraq War
"German Defense Minister Peter Struck re-ignited the transatlantic spat over the Iraq war by questioning the legality of the U.S.-led invasion. He said American unilateralism endangered NATO’s principle of consensus."
This item is immediately followed by another linked report on Chancellor Schroeder's recent return from the USA:
Schroeder: Let's Build a Free, Democratic and Stable Iraq
"In his first speech to parliament after returning from New York, Chancellor Schr?der says Germany and the United States are back on track and looking to the future of Iraq.
Reading the rest of this article and the one quoted above it is difficult to see how the Chancellor has reached that conclusion. As a non-involved observer I see the opposite.
Remembering that Germany was notable by the absence of its commiments at the recent Madrid Donors Conference. That it refuses to contribute troops. That it continues to push for an added role for the UN while that organaisation is principally engaged in withdrawing from Iraq. What exactly do they, and their French allies want to happen in that sorely suffering country?
Today seems an appropriate time to put this question as the news arrives of the US Senate's approval of an eighty seven and a half billion aid package for Iraq - CNN International
The USA having contributed the lions share of troops, weaponry and casualties to the liberation of Iraq is now proving the mean-spirited and constantly 'oil-grab' carping 'old' Europeans plainly wrong by the commitment of this huge aid package to the suffering people they almost single-handedly have liberated.
Britain has helped, but to their shame their own state broadcaster the BBC too often seems to adopt a tone of almost smug self-satisfaction when reporting present setbacks from 'occupied Baghdad'. The brave contribution of our armed forces and taxpayers funds thus seem downgraded.
If there is to be a success for individual liberties and some element of democracy emerging in Iraq, those now appearing to resent the speed of the American military success should stop looking backwards and get stuck in to helping rebuild this hugely important nation.
A positive attitude from France, Germany and their EU Ruling sycophants is a necessary first step.
One of the main IGC tussles over the voting rights reduction for Spain and Poland from the levels of the Nice Treaty to the Convention proposals remains totally unresolved following a meeting between Aznar and Schroeder according to this report from EU Business.
Late last night the European Finance Ministers for the Eurozone again shirked their clear responsibilities; this summary is from the Seattle Post Intelligence.
France wins support in EU budget battle
By PAUL GEITNER
AP BUSINESS WRITER
BRUSSELS, Belgium -- With strong backing from fellow budget-buster Germany, France got another reprieve from European Union finance ministers late Monday after promising new, as yet unspecified cuts in its ballooning deficit next year.
After confirming his government's intention to get its spending in line with euro rules by 2005 - a year late - French Finance Minister Francis Mer said he would offer details this month on more budget-balancing measures for 2004, according to EU officials.
EU Business in this report tells how the Netherlands backed off their threat to take the French to court over their deficit and constant breaches of the Growth and Stability pact:
The Netherlands, which has battled hard to remedy its own finances, had threatened to take the Commission to the European Court of Justice if the Commission did not bring France to heel.
It has been one of France's sternest critics for flouting the pact's key stricture, which requires EU countries to keep their public deficits under 3.0 percent of gross domestic product (GDP).
What will the applicant East European countries make of this spectacle of Euro inspired lunacy.
How can Blair still believe Euro entry could ever be in our nation's interests? (If he ever really did!).
EU Politix reports the agreement as a three week delay for further consideration, but other commentators are treating it as a clear victory for the Franco/German spendthrift pact busters.
The Spineless Bottom Feeders of the Conservative Party
In just over two days time, it seems that the British electorate will be presented with proof positive, that there is no living organism so far down the evolutionary scale, to compare in political terms with a British Conservative MP. Even in the deepest mud of the darkest, smelliest and most stagnant of ponds could there then lurk a lowlier equivalent?
Old Etonian Oliver Letwin, one of the earliest Tory MPs to make a deal with putative leader Howard and now famous for his recent crass remark about state schools and his own children was asked over the weekend:-
Some of Mr Clarke's friends made clear to Mr Howard's team that they wanted assurances for their support. David Curry, who could help sway up to 14 votes in Nick's Diner, a Clarke-ite dining club, said he wanted an assurance that there would be no attempt to pull Britain out f the new EU constitution if it was signed by Tony Blair; This of course is THE crucial question. I, and I expect most Tory supporters (and millions of non-Tories too) in the country, want to know just that:
Will Howard pledge to "pull Britain out of the new EU constitution if it is signed by Tony Blair"?
To which Letwin replied,MH is totally committed to a referendum
Further clarification was then sought by this internet debater, particularly as to whether Howard would grant a referendum on gaining power after Blair might have already signed the country up for the new constitution. Straight reply came there none, only this final exchange:
Questioner: Dear Oliver,
If you don't know yet, can't you find out? And if not today, then when?
Letwin wrote: When the dust has settled, and we have all had time to sit down and talk and think.
One of the Conservative Party's leading eurosceptics for many years was receiving copies of this e-mailed exchange and the last response to Letwin contained a question for him:-
Mon, 03 Nov 2003 10:49:36 +0100
Subject: Re: What IS Howard's position on the EU???
Oliver
Oh, so you mean after the leadership election? That will be too late.
In my view, if Howard DID give the assurance sought by David Curry, namely that he would not attempt - by referendum or any other means - to pull Britain out of the EU constitution once Blair has shoehorned us into it, then he should not be leader.
At present the membership is heading towards a voting paper where the only name on it will be Howard's (a bit reminiscent of the old Soviet-style East European elections...). I have read that there are a couple more days in which another contender could put his name down.
If Howard DID say YES to Curry, there jolly well ought to be another contender, don't you agree?
Why don't you ask him today?
Mr Redwood, don't you agree it would be disastrous if the Conservative Party were to be led on the basis of an (unrevealed) assurance given to Clarke that if Blair shoehorns the country into the EU constitution, the new leader will NOT attempt to pull us out?
I am sure that if this is the case, then when the membership finds out the Party will be destroyed by their outrage. I am told that some are already angry enough about the defenestration of IDS, and some are talking about de-selecting sitting MPs.
Signed T.
PS You will see that once again I have had to copy in the other recipients of my earlier message. I would be much obliged if you could hit the "Reply All" button when replying.
If any reply to that query has been sent we have yet to see it. We will, of course, post it here as soon as one might be received.
There is talk of deselection. The first targets that come to mind are those well known fans of our country's absorbtion into the EU such as Ken Clarke, Ian Taylor, etc. And who could argue that they should not have been so discarded long, long ago?
But worse are appearing as a result of this present crisis. The likes of Bill Cash, John Redwood and David Heathcote-Amory. Presumed stalwarts of the country's independence and always at the forefront of the supposed continuing fight against the EU.
At 11 o'clock this morning it will be 24 hours since the above question was put and left unanswered. Time enough for the truth to sink in to the slowest of minds and a rush of other candidates to have surged forward. But NONE have appeared!
Michael Howard, is so determined to get his hands onto the position of party leader and treat with the Eurofederalists that he is not willing to unequivocally state that he would remove us from the oppressive and totally unacceptable EU Constitution presently being negotiated within the IGC.
Michael Howard is so powerfully backed by the forces of Conservatism that the true craven natures of ordinary elected Conservative MPs is now fully exposed to the public view!
In the face of this treachery, where the individual freedoms, common law rights and unique democratic institutions of this country are planned to be destoyed, there is not one elected Conservative MP apparently prepared to step forward and offer himself to lead the party and save his nation.
The depth of the betrayal of the people of our country, if it continues through Thursday noon is so enormous it can barely be fully comprehended.
The one honourable exception to all the above, is Iain Duncan Smith, who under the party's election rules is not permitted to stand as a candidate!
Andrew Rawnsley in yesterday's Observer posed some other good questions for the Tories regarding their sudden choice of Howard in A caretaker, not a saviour among the many were these:
Michael Howard should be allowed to permit himself one of his glinting smiles about this dramatic change in his personal wheel of fortune. Suddenly, Tory MPs and right-wing commentators are united in fawning over his professionalism, gravitas, sharpness, shrewdness, honesty, grit and wit, attributes that entirely eluded them when he first offered himself as leader in 1997.
Then, the Home Secretary in John Major's rejected government was regarded by those same MPs and commentators as so voter-repellent and so definitely not the answer to the Tories' problems that he came fifth out of five in the leadership contest that produced William Hague.
A humiliated Mr Howard did not even enter the contest that threw up Iain Duncan Smith. He quit the frontbench altogether in 1999 to find something more worthwhile to do with his life. According to the scuttlebutt among Tory MPs, Michael Howard only returned to the Shadow Cabinet because he couldn't find a sufficiently rewarding job in the City.
If he was so wrong for the role six years ago that his party spanked him with the wooden spoon, what makes him so instantly right now?
EU Observer has a detailed analysis of the Constitutional Treaty document EUOBSERVER / COMMENT by Jonathan Kallmer practices international litigation and arbitration at the Washington, DC law firm of Hogan & Hartson L.L.P. Worth the read in full but the following brief quote gives a flavour:
First, it does not resemble a constitution. The language of the document is vague, verbose, and indecisive, and therefore woefully insufficient as a matter of process. Second, the document fails to cure the "democratic deficit" for which the Union has so long been characterized. Neither in form nor in substance does the draft constitution bring power closer to the people. In fact, it may do precisely the opposite.
Third, and most important, the document infringes too greatly on the sovereignty of the individual Member States. By proposing types of integration that would strip countries of some of their most essential functions, the draft constitution puts the Member States in the impossible (and unintended) position of choosing between Europe's integration and their own independence.
Virtually all of the document's flaws spring from its vast ambition, but the problem is not that the constitution is ambitious. Constitutions should be ambitious. The problem is that it is ambitious in ways that exacerbate the problems it was meant to remedy, undermine the fundamental principles of integration, and conflict with the idea of a constitution.
A report from Michael Howard: I've changed and so must the Tories indicates the putative Conservative leader is making headway convincing one section of the population, going from this report from UK.Gay.Com
All weekend I have had an old Kenny Rogers country hit running though my mind. So much so that I have been slowly adapting the words to suit current events. So on a lighter note try singing along the following to the tune of 'Coward of the County':
'Howard Of The Night-ee' (Original Lyrics by Kenny Rogers)
Everyone considered him the Howard of the night -ee
He'd never stand one single time to prove the people wrong.
His mama named him Michael, but folks just called him Drac -ee,
Something shudda told em they were reading Howard wrong.
He was old at 62 when Iain came a cropper;
Black looked after Michael, 'cause he was his chosen one.
I still recall the final words that Iain said to Michael,
"Drac my time is over, but yours has just begun".
CHORUS:
"Promise me, Drac, not to lead the party back --
Keep out of the centre, understand.
It will mean you're weak if you turn the other cheek
The EUs gonna bilk yer if it can,
Drac, you're gonna have to fight to be a man."
There's someone for everyone, and Iain's love was Country.
But Howards love was Power, and all should understand.
That the end of all his scheming , left Iain as an outcast,
And all the party faithful, feelin' they'd been scammed.
To be concluded when Michael Howard is confirmed as the Conservative's possibly 'Last' Leader.
Those wishing to hear Michael Howard fail to manage to explain how a man of his age has changed so much, what brought it about or even the areas where it has taken effect are invited to listen to the full interview by clicking this BBC Radio link.
Under 'Radio 4' click "Listen" and a new window will open with the Radio 4 Player. Click on the item for The Today Programme 8am to 9am and the interview starts ten minutes after the start of the broadcast.
The number of letters show the level of public interest in this matter and the content the widespread dismay over the prospect of a Howard leadership. Some examples;-
We remember Howard - bye, bye Tories
Now it seems certain the Conservatives are going to have Michael Howard as a leader, I wonder how short they think the British people's memories are.
Do they think we've forgotten he was an active and enthusiastic member of the most loathed Government in living memory? Do they think we've forgotten the manacled pregnant mothers giving birth, the unemployment, the poll tax riots?
Sorry, Tories, you have now guaranteed Labour a third term.
T P, London
03/11/2003
Tories just a giggle with Mr Nasty
I remember Theresa May saying the Tories must shed the "nasty party" image.
So, I had to laugh at the thought of one of the nastiest pieces of work in UK politics becoming their unelected leader.
M W, Newport, South Wales
03/11/2003
Last man with standing
At the next General Election, how could anyone vote for a party which admitted there was no election for a leader because only one MP in the entire party had any leadership qualities?
A H, St Erth, Cornwall
03/11/2003
Voting with my feet
The Tory MPs may accept Michael Howard as their leader, but they will lose at least one ordinary voter — me.
I will never vote Conservative while Michael Howard is leader.
The abyss is what the Tory MPs returning from their constituencies this morning are indeed now confronting. There is little good that has been said about their putative leader, apart from the supportive editorials mainly in papers of the Telegraph group and The Sun. Elsewhere the factual coverage reveals in full detail the multiple areas in which Howard's record in office will mercilessly work against him in the months to come.
It started with the 20 things to know in the Daily Record, continued through a searching Guardian Special Report, went on through the Independent linked in the post below, all the way to the drug dealing cousin stories in the Sunday Mirror and the similar coverage in The Guardian.
As all this and the line of questioning taken in this morning's Today interview (where the constant theme was 'have you really changed?') begins to sink in to the wishfully thinking heads of the average Tory MP, hopefully alarm bells will now begin to ring very loudly.
Only the Sunday Times hinted at any possibility of another candidature, that being from Michael Portillo, who was reported to have said ...he was "pretty supportive" of Howard, he emphasised the need for the new leader to undertake sweeping reforms of policy. Portillo stepped back from frontline politics after he failed to win the leadership in 2001 but his views as a party big-hitter are still highly influential."
These reviews of policy must be watched particularly closely this week, especially after a second scheduled meeting with Ken Clarke confirmed by Howard on Radio 4 this morning. Europe seems to be being forgotten, certainly in the Radio interview, strengthening suspicions that Howard's Eurosceptcism is the main change that has been sold downstream!
This morning's Telegraph denies the Portillo wavering, but this paper which has almost seemed to have been the guiding force of this coup d'etat since the resignation announcement of Charles Moore, can consequently be almost entirely discounted in anything it now has to say as far as impartiality, the EU or the Tory Leadership handover are concerned.
We will continue to monitor events and certainly not forget that this week in the EU Finance Minister's meeting, the Euro could take its first step towards its Waterloo as predicted by Wim Duisenberg last Friday. The IGC and EU Constitutional matters will continue to be regularly updated.
But as shadow Foreign Secretary under William Hague, he refused to go along with those on the Tory right, including Conrad Black, the proprietor of The Daily Telegraph, who advocated that the UK join the US, Canada and Mexico in North America's free trade zone, warning that it would jeopardise Britain's membership of the EU.
The Sunday Mirror carries a report with even more potential to embarass the soon to be appointed Leader of the consequently to be doomed Conservatives. JAILBIRD IS SKELETON IN HOWARD'S CUPBOARD. It begins:-
MICHAEL Howard's drug-dealing cousin will come back to haunt him on the very day he is due to take over as Conservative leader.
Simon Bakerman, jailed for three years for masterminding a £20m drugs ring will leave HMP Kirkham, near Preston, with an electronic tag strapped to his ankle on Thursday - the same day Mr Howard will offically take over from Iain Duncan Smith as leader of the Tories.
....and continues to describe the story behind his recent imprisonment. Worse it then continues with details of an earlier incident in 1997:-
It is not the first time Bakerman has embarrassed his famous relative.
Mr Howard became embroiled in controversy in 1997 when he ordered the early release of two Liverpool drug barons.
John Haase and Paul Bennett were freed after serving 11 months of an 18-year sentence for masterminding a £15million heroin smuggling ring between Turkey and Liverpool.
It later emerged that Bakerman knew both men and questions were raised in the House of Commons as Mr Howard was Home Secretary in John Major's government when he sanctioned the pair's release.
In return for their freedom the men struck a deal to provide information about arms and drug caches in the city.
Amazingly, after his release, Haase continued his criminal activities and slit the throat of a rival.
The whole article makes both surprising reading and the Tory MPs recent behaviour even less comprehensible.
Out from the shadows to seize control Gaby Hinsliff and Kamal Ahmed have put together a well researched report in The Observer on the events in the Conservative Party from which we quote three paragraphs as a sample below:-
Like most fairytales, the incredible rebirth of Michael Howard - disgraced as Home Secretary over the sacking of prison chief Derek Lewis, humiliated in the 1997 leadership contest when he trailed in third of three right-wingers, dismissed as a has-been when he stepped down from William Hague's Shadow Cabinet two years later, only to rise magically from the ashes last week - is a little too good to be true.
'Michael has had the great advantage of being all things to all men,' says a senior Tory figure who served close to him in government. 'He's never been a proper right-winger, in fact: he is politically androgynous. He has pulled together the Portillo group, his own rather small group and a penumbra of others who have nowhere else to go.'
Howard's past statements on everything from the poll tax to rising unemployment and gay rights will be flung back at him over the dispatch box, week after week. 'What we need to demonstrate is Howard is an old right-winger pretending to be something different,' said one senior adviser to the Prime Minister.
Some of the unfortunate baggage that Howard carries with him into the Leadership of what should be a new 21st Century Conservative Party was listed in Scotland's Daily Record
His looks and Transylvanian ancestry earned his Dracula tag. Anne Widdecombe said he had ``something of the night'' about him.
Howard was the smirking face behind Thatcher's hated Poll Tax and tested it out on Scots.
He was also responsible for the Section 28 law, discriminating against homosexuals.
He voted for David Alton's Bill to reduce access to abortion.
Howard fought against the national minimum wage, claiming it would cost two million jobs.
As Environment Secretary, he let power generators keep their pollution levels secret.
As Employment Secretary, Howard opposed EU plans for a maximum 48-hour working week.
He refused to recognise an EC directive allowing mums to get guaranteed maternity leave.
He wanted to place police authorities under Home Office control instead of representatives chosen by local people.
His police reform plans were branded ``unacceptable'' by Tory grandee Sir Willie Whitelaw.
His answer to crime was simply to lock more people up, stating: ``An increase in the number of criminals in prison leads to a large fall in crime.''
As Home Secretary, the Appeal Court slammed his ``abuse of power''.
He was found to be acting illegally by the European Court of Human Rights seven times.
He cut access to health care and education for asylum seekers.
Less than a year ago, he claimed: ``I will never stand again for the leadership of the party.''
A recent ICM poll found that 26 per cent of people are less likely to vote Tory with him as leader.
As was to be expected from The Sunday Telegragh which was in the vanguard of the media working towards the overthrow of Iain Duncan Smith it now goes overboard in pushing Michael Howard's candidature. Howard tells party activists: Don't risk our new unity
is the headline of an article by Colin Brown and Francis Elliott where the elderly Howard is pictured looking every inch the drawn and failed politician he should by now have been.
Elsewhere in an interview by Dominic Lawson we are asked to believe that there was no deal with David Davies, no deal with Ken Clarke and that the whole thing had come as a complete surprise. Before setting aside the paper as the piece of blatant propaganda it has clearly become, interesting to note that Bruce Anderson seems to have arrived as a columnist from The Spectator via The Sun. Another sign of shifting priorities?
Meantime in The Sunday Times the first faint sign that some slight element of common sense might be returning at least somewhere within the Conservative Party, in a report that Michael Portillo might be having doubts about Howard!
When all EU thoughts tend to be on the IGC and the Constitution a timely report has been prepared by EU Business reminding us that the expansion process is still only underway and that the accession countries are often far from ready to join.
It also highlights the fact that yesterday was the tenth anniversary of the disastrous Maastricht Treaty which looks likely to begin to be tested to destruction by the Finance Ministers next week when they meet to discuss what should be the size of the fines on France.
The final paragraph highlights the fact that there could still be scope for slip-ups in the enlargement process. (Remember the Chirac threat!):-
The 10 future members signed the accession treaty to launch a new EU era in Rome in April, and have already ratified it. The 15 current member states have to follow suit by next May. So far only four have done so, but this process is not expected to produce any nasty surprises.
The Sun carries an article regarding a warning by Shell and BP to the blindfolded Blair Administration regarding the dangers the EU Constitution poses to our nation's energy independence. That, of course, comes from the reserves that mainly lie beneath the North Sea, already fishless as a result of earlier continental avarice and British Governmental incompetence.
Read the entire article from this link: Wake up, Mr Blair ( read on about British troops and French Generals if you wish) or get the drift of the oil story only from these brief quotes:-
In his letter to the Government, BP chief Lord Browne expressed his concern over the effect of the energy chapter of the constitution.
The oil giant fears it would give Brussels sweeping powers over the £21-billion-a-year North Sea industry.
Britain could find itself in a position where the EU took control of oil tax, licensing arrangements, security of supply and the regulation of hardware like pipelines.
...................
The Oil and Gas Industry Leadership Team, the industry’s umbrella group, fears thousands of jobs are under threat. It also believes the industry could be forced to contract in size and axe billions of pounds of investment.
The Team wrote to Mr Blair last week expressing “very serious concerns” about the EU masterplan. Spokesman Sir Ian Wood said: “Our concern is that the chapter will subject our industry to new uncertainties and risks.
“These increased uncertainties will reduce investment, accelerate job losses and significantly
reduce the amount of oil and gas recovered.”
Tory MP David Heathcoat-Amory warned the constitution would be “extremely damaging” to the oil industry.
He said: “It will allow the EU the right to interfere in our oil reserves.”
Mr Blair has dismissed calls for a referendum on the constitution — just as he rejected initial warnings about the threat to our oil industry.
Pakistan's Daily Times with other Eastern papers has this statement by Anders Fogh Rasmussen the Danish PM regarding the EU Constitution. Principal sticking points seem to be:-
* it must respect the central role of member states and it must maintain the balance between larger and smaller members;
* the institutional structure must be efficient, democratic, and transparent.
The second point alone should rule the present draft straight out of court, but politicians being what they are don't of course really mean democracy when they use the word. Even so 'efficient' and 'transparent' also seem objectives too far in this Convention's proposals.
On the number of Commissioners Denmark is suggesting one per country but that the work of the Commission be concentrated in 15-19 portfolios. The heaviest portfolios should be shared among a number of commissioners, one of them responsible for coordination.
The larger countries have conceded their second commissioner in the name of efficiency. The proposal to reduce Commissioners to 15 also for the sake of this same efficiency was the offset expected from the smaller countries. There is no valid intellectual argument that such efficiency is either necessary or will be achieved, however, as decisions are taken by simple majority vote amongst Commissioners. Therefore 25 could be equally as efficient as 15.
A Democratic, Effiicient and Transparent way of appointing Commissioners would be to determine from time to time the number of portfolios needed for the Commission to function. To divide the total population by that number of portfolios and appoint commissioners according to that split on a roughly evenly spread geographical basis. Too simple? Too democratic? Too efficient? or Too Democratic?
The other main area of concern to the Danes is the division of powers between the President and Chair of the European Council, which paragraph we quote in full, leaving our readers to decide whether a recommendation either way might lie within:-
The purpose of the European Council Chair is to ensure the coherence and decision-making capacity of the European Council. He or she must of course be given the necessary means to perform this task. At the same time we must avoid creating a presidential system that functions independently of the Council, the Commission, and the member states. But if we do not integrate the President of the European Council into the existing institutional structure and relegate the presidency to presiding over the meetings of the European Council, we will miss an important chance to strengthen the overall decision-making capacity of the Union. We also risk creating competing structures that will weaken the institutions as a whole.
Use eBay's PayPal service if you appreciate this blog - to make fast, easy and secure donations to help towards our broadband and other costs! martin.cole@gmail.com Many thanks!.
