Iraq was of course the year’s biggest story, but the true consequences of that action have yet to emerge. The lead-up to the rapidly successful invasion has left international fractures just as severe as those still daily apparent in the ongoing Baghdad street battles; the latter at least being fought to impose order and bring liberty to that country.
As the UN skirmishing began, at the start of this year, it was not completely clear where the battle lines would finally be drawn. Even now many months on, there still remain a few who are yet to be correctly categorised. The Blair government, in my view surprisingly, now falls into that category. But how can we best now define the opposing philosophies?
In my mind, what we witnessed at the UN and subsequently is a battle royal between those who see violence (they would say the use of force) as a legitimate and essential tool of foreign policy in defence of liberty and those who previously had maintained a position of ’force only as an absolute last resort’, which the Iraq conflict has exposed to essentially mean NEVER.
First blood, even before a shot had been fired, went to the presumed ‘warmongers‘. Their initial success, won within the UN Security Council and underplayed in press coverage and TV news headlines across the globe, lay in their exposing the fact that their opponents’ fig leaf statement of ‘violence only as a last resort’ (up to then credible given the ‘surgical’ bombing campaign in Serbia), had by early 2003 evolved to mean ’violence practically never’.
The ’Gun-Barrel Diplomats’ led by a group that has become known as ‘neocons’ in the George W Bush Administration and followed with varying degrees of enthusiasm by those nations (or their present Governments) presently forming a part of the ’coalition’ on the ground in Iraq were principally: Britain, Australia, Poland, Spain, Italy, etc.
The ‘Violence Never’ group were, of course, led by the Franco/German duo, Chirac and Schroeder, behind whom came most of the UN Security Council and General Assembly, almost all International Non-Governmental Organisations, proponents of the Global Civil Society, others who their opponents describe as Transnational Progressivists, supranationalists who make-up practically the entire EU elite and the peace movement in general, all of whom, for simplicity, I shall describe here as ‘Internationalists’.
This battle of ideas is being fought with real bullets, bombs and grenade launchers across Iraq. Following the flight of the UN and most of the NGOs, the foot soldiers for the Internationalists are the rump Fedayeen and Baath Party fanatics still loyal to the now captured Saddam Hussein. Were I in Schroeder or a Chirac‘s shoes, this fact alone might force a reconsideration as to how I had put myself in such an uncomfortable position. They, however, have demonstrated an inability to confront such harsh realities; but nevertheless continue to have the support of surprisingly large numbers of their countrymen.
The ordinary servicemen in Iraq, mainly US but supported by British, Polish, Italian and many other nationalities, are fighting and dying in the cause of freedom for the Iraqi people and to demonstrate an international willingness to confront and resist tyranny wherever it may appear. George W Bush’s speeches when he rejected past US policies of appeasing despots were a truly historic turning point, for which 2003 might later also become noteworthy.
What dream or philosophy are the Internationalists offering the world, as they try to hide their obvious desire for a huge American setback in Iraq ? None, that I have been able to discern or unearth.
The year ahead will be tough in Iraq, Afgahnistan, Pakistan and the Middle East. Possibly terrorist acts will be seen in western democracies once again.
At least the USA seems to have coolly appraised its options and committed itself to what appears to this writer an honourable course. The coming Presidential election will be key! If only such unselfish realism could become more widespread in the New Year.
The steadfastness of purpose shown by the European leaders of countries which have recently suffered casualties in Iraq has been for me one of the more hopeful events of the year.
Elsewhere the non-agreement of an EU Constitution is cause enough for tonight’s champagne!
I wish a very happy and prosperous new year to all those who from time to time have visited this blog to follow my often rambling and sometimes disjointed views.
....Of course, we have lots of problems that the EU wants to see resolved: unfettered corruption, poor public administration, a justice system that makes a mockery of impartiality, and an economy which, despite some progress, has not yet been declared a "functioning market" by the European Commission.
The above is taken from a Christmas day item in 'The Taipei Times'. Surprisingly enough, it is not the EU itself that is the subject of the criticism, but an applicant country Romania. (This country appears a perfect match!)
The article continues: But it is agriculture, and in particular the Romanian pig, that is causing the severest headaches in Bucharest and in Brussels. This can be read in full by clicking on the descriptive title that follows:
I enjoyed this newly discovered blog which describes a recent visit to France and an interesting observation on blogging:-
One thing is clear to me: in these extraordinary times blogs are the most political form of writing we have, possibly the most significant in terms of changing people's minds. I won't pull back. I'll do my professional work, spend time with my family (most important!) and keep blogging. Who needs sleep?
I have just watched an edition of BBC World Television's programme, Hardtalk. It being mid-way through the holiday season, neither the first nor second division interviewers appeared to be available and I encountered a new face (by the name of John Soper, I believe, whose name flashed briefly by at the programme's end). No matter what name, however, as this criticism is not directed at any one individual; but rather at the Corporation as a whole.
What process produces these automatons I wondered, as the standard Anti-American, Anti- Israeli, pro-multilateralist, bi-polar claptrap spewed forth? Is there a production line established deep within British society that leads from state primary school to comprehensive secondary through to university, delivering its end-product 'BBCMindlessMoron Mark X', ready-made to the state broadcasting interviewer's spot.
How is mankind's ability to employ independent thought removed and what happens to natural human curiosity and a facility for doubt? For every one of these creations that we see before the camera, how many more must exist in the production teams and other departments? What can a meal be like in a BBC dining room or other social facility? Don't any of these apparently mindless zombies ever thirst to hear a difference of view? Clearly not!
Regrettably it makes for very dull television and as we can all too often witness, a woefully ill-informed audience. Now in whose interest is that?
EU Indifference to Economic Growth or its Citizen's Wellbeing!
The strength of the Euro gives Europe's corrupted and blinkered ruling elite a wonderful sense of macho pride as they strut the world stage. The dreadful prospects for growth, consequent unemploment and resulting discomforts for Europe's ordinary citizens apparently leave them unfazed. A report on their indifference can be read in this article from Forbes that is linked from here, a chilling quote from which is this:-
"The ECB's line still is that it is difficult to justify being concerned."
London's Financial Times ran an article a day or two ago that indicated some degree of concern was at last beginning to percolate into the minds of some ECB officials at least, as it included this quote:
The ECB policymaker said the bank needed time to assess the magnitude and
persistence of the euro's appreciation. Its performance over the next "four to eight weeks" could influence the outlook on interest rates. He said therapid strengthening of the euro had "introduced an element of uncertainty" into the outlook for the eurozone economy.
The rise in the euro has been well underway for more than a year now, and the likely effects on EU growth and prosperity have been the subject of several posts on this blog alone. What more proof can be given of the true nature of the 'EU project' and the total lack of interest, of those who drive it , in the welfare of Europe's citizens!
According to an article on the site of Deutsche Welle the German State Broadcaster, Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker is presently a favoured candidate as next EU President. Read a June 1999 interview here which is most informative in light of subsequent events which prove his predictive abilities are almost non-existent. The concluding paragraph of his position on Iraq was this:-
“Both Mrs Polfer and myself will commit ourselves in next Monday’s and Tuesday’s sessions to generate a common, unwavering and substantial position that responds to the European Union’s peace ambitions.”
This quote is from a speech made at Cambridge University linked here:-
The Prime Minister is a more enthusiastic Europhile than even the most committed British politician. "Deepening Europe is peace policy too," he believes.
Things can only get worse is the headline of the Leading Article in this morning's Daily Telegraph and if you read it through to the end, one will certainly find it hard to form any other conclusion. The final sentences of the comment are hardly designed to launch one into the New Year festivities full of cheer, as can be read below:-
But things cannot carry on as they are indefinitely. Under every past Labour government, higher taxes and increased regulations have led eventually to economic failure. Sooner or later, it will happen again.
A good description of recent inner EU frictions and curtain raiser for the coming political battle in Italy can be found here in this article from Insight Magazine.
There is also an item in the same magazine headlined Draft Constitution Divides Europeans which implies the collapse of the constitutional talks was decided in advance by Chirac and Schroeder:
Before the EU summit collapsed in disarray, two of its main protagonists met for dinner in a Japanese restaurant in the Belgian capital. At the dinner, German Chancellor Gerhard Schröeder and French President Jacques Chirac decided not to provide the concessions some member-states wanted. A French source said they didn't want to agree on a bad deal.
Such is a headline from this morning's Western Morning News which accompanying article may be read in full by clicking here.
Britain's fisheries which were obtained through European deceit and Tory Party duplicity could well prove to be the spark that ignites the funeral pyre upon which the UK's bonds to Europe will be finally severed. Bradshaw the misfortunate Fisheries Minister is, of course, himself a West Country MP.
The Radio Netherland Press Review, which can be read in full from here, makes this false assertion:-
Choice between civilization and growth With the year drawing to a close, several papers assess the current economic slump in the Netherlands............the real issue is "the fundamental choice between a welfare state and a pure market economy", a choice between "civilization" and growth, no less.
This is pure EU hogwash par excellance the cause for the Dutch, French, German, Italian in fact most of the Eurozone's economic woes is of course the Euro obsession that has blinded Euroland's politicians from making the hard political choices they would otherwise have been forced to face....Maybe 2004 will be the year when this fact finally sinks in to even the longest suffering EU consumer! Check out how Sweden has fared since they voted NO! Sweden Q3 growth outshines euro zone, exports surge
An interesting article in today's IHT reported on the fate of a French Journalist who has written a book about the biased reporting (not restricted to France) of this year's events in Iraq. Read it from here. A small quote:-
"He regards the single most cohesive element as French anti-Americanism."
Another area of dispute still outstanding is whether Europe's Christian roots should be mentioned in the Constitution. It is not an area on which we have aired the arguments as our view is that relgious mention has no place in such a document. Many others hold strong views on the matter and it could well be another area that figures largely in the eventual fate of the entire agreement. This article in the Straits Times of Singapore, provides a well balanced view of the arguments and can be read from here - God Bless or Divide the EU.
The Scotsman reports this afternoon that the Foreign Secretary believes his Red Lines over the Constitution are well accepted and will not be re-opened. Time will tell! The article is linked from here.
The Washington Times publishes this fitting summary of the EU's past year by Barry Renfrew of the Associated PressSquabble-riven EU limps through '03 Some high (low?) -lights:-
angry governments squabbled over Iraq - The European Union split - "The crisis over Iraq has left deep scars," said political analyst Maxime Lefebvre of the French Institute of International Relations. - there was no disguising the bitterness that lingered - The move to unite Europe continued amid the usual mix of idealism, recrimination and fudging - Efforts this month to frame a European constitution foundered - Europe dithered on how to handle its limping economy and high unemployment. - France and Germany effectively wrecked an agreement on limiting government spending - European business is weighed down by bureaucracy and high taxes - stabbing murder of Sweden's foreign minister as she shopped - the old scourge of anti-Semitism.
The web site of Sky Headline News is running a poll as to whether or not Blair will have resigned before the next election, poll obsessed as he is if enough people vote that they think he will be gone he could well be driven in that direction. Vote from here
Following the earlier explosion of two waste receptacles near the EU Commission President's Bologna home before Christmas, EU Business now reports that the Commissariat's number one has received and opened a parcel bomb:
Romano Prodi, the head of the European Union's executive commission, escaped unharmed Saturday when he opened a booby-trapped parcel, triggering it to catch on fire, his spokesman said
The report from Houston24News on this incident states that Prodi's home is in Brussels and that he he is merely staying in Bologna for Christmas, tax implications perhaps?
Tony Blair's Britain 6 Years On - 'Mad World' (of hopelessness?)
The following are the lyrics of the surprise Number 1 'Top of the Pops' Christmas Chart Topper:-
Mad World
"All around me are familiar faces
Worn out places, worn out faces
Bright and early for their daily races
Going nowhere, going nowhere
And their tears are filling up their glasses
No expression, no expression
Hide my head I want to drown my sorrow
No tomorrow, no tomorrow
And I find it kind of funny
I find it kind of sad
The dreams in which I'm dying
Are the best I've ever had
I find it hard to tell you
'Cos I find it hard to take
When people run in circles
It's a very, very
Mad World
Children waiting for the day they feel good
Happy Birthday, Happy Birthday
Made to feel the way that every child should
Sit and listen, sit and listen
Went to school and I was very nervous
No one knew me, no one knew me
Hello teacher tell me what's my lesson
Look right through me, look right through me"
Prompted by our post of yesterday, regarding the Reuters wrong referendum result, we began to wonder about the development of public opinion in that country since then and found this in an EUobserver report about growing anti-EU opinion in Norway:-
'At the same time a new poll in Sweden shows that only 38 percent of questioned would want their country to join the single currency. According to a Skop poll quoted by Ekot/Sveriges Radio, 59 percent of Swedes are against joining the euro.
The opposition to euro has increased since the referendum. During the referendum in September 56 percent of Swedes voted against joining the euro.'
Britain again among few Dupes to enact EU Arrest Warrant
This item come from Singapore's Straits TimesEU states fail to adopt rule on arrest warrant , which highlights the fact that Britain is one of only four countries within the EU to enact the restrictive legislation on an EU-wide arrest warrant before the year-end deadline. The newspaper article ends with this quote:
A Commission official said: 'A delay is never good news, but we have every reason to feel relieved if it is just a matter of months rather than the catastrophic scenario for which we were getting ready.' -- Financial Times
If something seems a catastrophe for an EU Commission official, then it can only mean freedom and relief for Europe's citizens.... bring it on!
Unsurprising that no thought should be given to British Citizens' legal rights with a Home Secretary who achieved one of the worst ever 'Mastermind' scores, read here and here.
Up to this point it has only been possible to speculate that the New Labour ministers who rule us are amongst the most stupid people in the country.....now we have the clear evidence!
This is just the kind of move designed to be welcomed by the man in the street, impossible to enforce and probably only ever to be put into effect in Britain! A fitting announcement to end a year that has been an unmitigated disaster for the corrupt and crumbling European Union.
If only it were to turn its attention to democratic accountability in the year ahead, instead of more grandoise and unenforceable, impractical schemes!
In compiling a year-end review of the blog the 'Most Horrible Howler' is awarded to Peter Stark of Reuters who had this item published in the Washington Post, which announced that the Swedes had voted for the Euro see Ironies post on 14th September:
Sweden Votes to Adopt Euro
By Peter Starck
Reuters
Sunday, September 14, 2003; 11:44 AM
STOCKHOLM, Sept 14 -- Swedes voted on Sunday on scrapping the crown to become the 13th member of the euro after opinion polls showed sympathy votes for slain pro-euro Foreign Minister Anna Lindh eroding the "No" side's long-standing lead.
As we stated at the time 'Let's hope in their rush to be first they have got it wrong'.
Following from our post below, this item in the online edition of the Indianapolis Star regarding the US oil firms Occidental, Amerada Hess, Conoco (now Conoco/Phillips) and Marathon highlights other potential difficulties ahead:
'French heavyweight Total. Libya pumps about 1.5 million barrels of crude a day, or 2 percent of world supplies, and is the second-largest producer in Africa behind Nigeria'.
The cancellation of three round trip Paris/Los Angeles flights over the Christmas period is causing renewed angst between the two countries according to this report in this morning's Daily Telegraph titled US in row with France over terror operation
US/Libya Policies in contrast to those of EU towards Syria
This paragraph appeared in a report from the Asia Times filed from Athens on 24th December:-
Outside the Grande Bretagne, Queen Sophia Avenue was decked out with crossed Greek and Syrian flags. Despite the display being standard protocol for any state visit, the sight of the Syrian Ba'ath Party's colors fluttering outside the Greek parliament - just days after another Ba'athist leader, Saddam Hussein, was apprehended in Iraq - caused some perturbed Greeks to raise their eyebrows.
The full report can be read from here. More on the differences in attitudes between The EU's Chris Patten's curious policies and those of the USA can be found in this earlier item from Lebanon's Daily Star.
It is not possible to know exactly where W.T. Stead timeline obtained the inspiration for his far reaching ideas. Possibly from Macauley or leading liberals of the earlier part of the nineteenth century; perhaps we should look even further back to the dreams of Simon de Montfort themselves possibly rooted in the continental horrors of the Albigensian Crusades. The origin is, however, not too important for we can now, with the internet, easily trace where they seem to have led.
In 1880 Stead first used the term “United States of Europe” an electioneering phrase for Gladstone' Liberals. In the 1890's he fully explored his ideas with Rhodes, Milner and others and eventually set them forth in his book 'Europa' which was written in 1899. The driving force for his dreams can possibly best be summarised as 'THE ERADICATION OF THE NATION STATE IN THE CAUSE OF PEACE'. A quote- “ So far, therefore, we have come in our pilgrimage to the United States of Europe, that the power of the sword, which last century was a practical reality in the hands of a hundred potentates, is now practically limited to three persons, without whose permission no gun may be fired in wrath in the whole Continent”
From Carroll Quigley’s The Anglo-American Establishment: From Rhodes to Cliveden, Books In Focus, New York 1981 we can follow Stead’s path to his meeting with Cecil Rhodes Peter Myers Online Analysis:
(Page 35)In 1894 Stead discussed with Rhodes how the secret society would work and wrote about it after Rhodes's death as follows: "We also discussed together various projects for propaganda, the formation of libraries, the creation of lectureships, the dispatch of emissaries on missions of propaganda throughout the Empire, and the steps to be taken to pave the way for the foundation and the acquisition of a newspaper which was to be devoted to the service of the cause."
Much more can be gathered from the link provided to the first rate analysis of Quigley's book by Peter Myers, so few extra quotes are needed here:
(Page 40)we can be certain that six were initiates. These were Rhodes, Lord Rothschild, Johnston, Stead, Brett, and Milner. Of these, Rothschild was largely indifferent and participated in the work of the group only casually.
(Page241)From 1921 onward, the Milner Group and the British government (if the two policies are distinguishable) did all they could to lighten the reparations burden on Germany and to prevent France from using force to collect reparations. The influence of the Milner Group on the government in this field may perhaps be indicated by the identity of the two policies. It might also be pointed out that a member of the Group, Arthur (now Sir Arthur) Salter, was general secretary of the Reparations Commission from 1920 to 1922
In “The Great Deception” Christopher Booker and Richard North, Continuum 2003 Chapter 1 ’The Birth of an Idea’ the links between Arthur Salter and Jean Monnet, (the acknowledged EU driving force) are clearly established. The authors on Pages 16/17 quote from Salter’s 'The United States of Europe” 1931 by Arthur Salter this passage:
‘the commercial and tariff policy of European States is so central and crucial a part of their general policy, the receipts from Customs are so central and substantial a part of their revenues, that a common political authority, deciding for all Europe what tariffs should ber imposed and how they would be distributed, would be for every country almost as important as, or even more important than, the national Governments, and would in effect reduce the latter to the status of municipal authorities.’
Christmas Comes Early as Tories Attack Blair on EU
Surprise, suprise! The new Conservative joint party Chairperson has launched an attack on the governement on the subject of the EU. This report from epolitix is confirmed by this in The Herald.
Hasn't France appeared to be prepared to do almost anything to woo certain 'rogue states' of recent years....I think so - but here is yet another mistake, highlighted in this report from the BBC Website:
Iranian President Mohammad Khatami has called on France to review its proposed ban on overt religious signs, such as headscarves, in schools.
"I hope the French Government, which claims to be avant-garde in liberty, equality and fraternity, will cancel this wrong decision," he said.
He told reporters that banning the headscarf would be "a kind of extreme nationalistic tendency".
French President Jacques Chirac gave his support for the ban last week.
The Parmalat hole is reported to now have reached 7 billion Euros and could still rise to 10 billion as a question mark hangs over 3 billion euros worth of its own bonds it supposedly bought back. The volume of dairy products bought by this company was so large that Italy has requested an exemption of EU state aid restrictions to help its agricultural sector. If not granted they presumably will follow the example of France and Germany with the stability pact and just go ahead anyway. Though Prodi preparing to fight an election against Berlusconi hardly seems likely to refuse. EU Business update can be read here.
A Reuters report, just in, advises that a scanner was used to falsify a bank statement showing a balance of 3.9 billion euros as being in a Cayman Islands Parmalat bank account when it was not. Can't believe it; then use this link or read these quotes:-
One of Europe's biggest ever corporate crises exploded last week when the firm said a document showing 3.95 billion euros (2.78 billion pounds) held by a Cayman Islands unit, Bonlat Financing Corp, had been declared false by Bank of America.....
Italian newspapers said on Tuesday that investigators had established that a scanning machine had been used to falsify Bank of America documents which were then used to convince auditors that it had billions of euros in cash and investments.
The Independent reports Charles Kennedy as being confident a reconsideration of the first past the post electoral system will be undertaken by the Government before the next election. The article can be read from here
The report in the Daily Telegraph linked from here, that France was unaware of the negotiations with Libya over WMD highlights a problem for the EU as a whole and PM Blair in particular.
The potential loss of the experimental fusion reactor from Cadarache to Japan which seemed likely yesterday after a decision was deferred until February would be a massive failure for EU diplomacy. For Tony Blair, who has made Britain's place in Europe a major plank of his adminstrations policy for years, to now be publicly exposed as mistrusting our cross channel neighbour over nine months of delicate negotiations is something of an humiliation, giving his drive to integrate the country ever further into Europe, the appearance of a farce.
This embarassment risks making a mockery of the elaborate arrangements he has planned to celebrate the hundred year anniversary of the Entente Cordiale in 2004. It will be interesting to study how that arrangement is viewed after a year of close analysis of its effects on the past dreadful century!
We posted Christopher Booker's report on Neil Herron's bagging of company names last Sunday, and now have this further report from The Journal of Newcastle that can be read from here
Parmalat whose shares collapsed today amid talk of billions of Euros (possibly up to ten billion) gone missing is already being referred to as Europe's Enron, see particularly a Leading Article in today's Financial Times which concludes with this long list of questions:-
The ramifications go far beyond Italy, affecting banks and bond-holders in other European countries and the US. Much remains to be established: how Parmalat built an impenetrable web of offshore transactions, how auditors failed to prevent money being drained away, how ratings agencies granted investment status on the basis of poor information and why banks and investors risked money on a company they palpably did not understand. Once the lessons are clear, reform must follow.
One not asked but at the forefront of my mind is what role was played by the single European currency, the Euro. If fraud does indeed play a part was it made easier by the lack of oversight from a local and national central bank and secondly will the entire Eurozone now suffer the backlash. In the past only the lira would have been likely to show the effects!
Apt Quotation Apropos the still alive and 't'icking EU Constitution
From Daniel Webster who said the following regarding the US constitution:
"Good intentions will always be pleaded for any assumption of power. The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
Needless to say the EU Constitution proposed by disgraced French ex-President Valery Giscard d'Estaing works in the reverse direction!
Hitting back at the comments made recently by Italian PM Berlusconi regarding the disaster that the single currency is clearly proving, Commission President Prodi is reported by EUobserver to have responded as follows:-
"It's about time that these lies are brought to an end", Mr Prodi dryly said, according to La Repubblica. Reacting to Mr Berlusconi's statements, Romano Prodi said the reason the prices have increased only in Italy is due to lack of surveillance in the country.
But who is the Liar? Read this item from BNP Paribas Research and form your own opinion:-
At last, ECB's worries regarding inflation seem to be founded. Indeed, inflation in the major EMU countries was particularly disappointing during the past year, while the output gap even widened. For instance, the eurozone HCPI was up 2.1% y/y in October. French inflation edged up to 2.3% in November, after 2.2% in October, the highest level since last March. This resilience of headline inflation has resulted, first, from a surge in food and tobacco prices, but also from higher core inflation . In Spain, inflation was up 2.7% in November, after 2.9% in October, mainly due to temporary factors, such as the strong increase in energy prices compared with the same period last year. Though it has narrowed in recent months, inflation differential between Spain and the euro zone remains marked, at 0.7 percentage point in November, versus 1.0 point in Q3 2003 and 1.7points in Q4 2002.
The BBC reports in an item that can be read by clicking here, that Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi has admitted that:-
the euro had "so far produced many negative effects."
These are of course destruction of democratic processes on a pan-european basis, unemployment, recession, huge corruption, institutionalised deceit etc., etc.
The propoganda brainwashing that accompanies the whole disgusting EU project continues apace however, as a phone discussion with a French relative has just revealed, after a long listing of all that country's problems, my suggestion that the Euro might be a contributory factor is met by the response ' but there is now no alternative'. Incroyable
We commend this article In Brussels, they don't have a Plan B from the Sunday Telegraph by Daniel Hannen Conservative MEP for South East England who belongs to a party that belives Britain's future remains with the EU, in spite of his otherwise plainly sensible views, some of which we quote below:
Yet, even in his own terms, Mr Blair has failed. His defence of fiscal sovereignty is 30 years too late: the EU already has a say over VAT, corporate taxation, permissible deficits and how to define tax evasion.
As for foreign affairs, it is worth quoting exactly what Mr Blair has agreed to: "The Union's competence in matters of common foreign and security policy shall cover all areas of foreign policy and all questions relating to the Union's security. Member states shall actively and unreservedly support the Union's common foreign and security policy in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity." If this is a red line, I hate to think of what would constitute a concession.
The constitution will be back, make no mistake - conceivably as early as March. Let us not be caught off guard a second time.
This is an item from this morning's Christopher Booker column in the Sunday Telegraph, linked from here
Neil Herron, the Sunderland-based campaign director of the North-East Against A Regional Assembly, last week presented Stephen Barber, the director of the North-East Assembly, with a special Christmas surprise.
Mr Barber is the man entrusted by John Prescott with ensuring that next year's referendum will record a "yes" vote for the North-East to become the first of England's eight "Euro-regions" outside London with its own elected parliament. But all this year Mr Herron has been a thorn in his flesh, not least through the district auditor's ruling that the North-East Assembly had been misusing local authority funds by campaigning for an elected assembly.
Alarmed that they might become personally liable for this spending, the unelected members of the North-East Assembly - like those of other regional assemblies - were advised to "incorporate" themselves as a limited company.
They have now spent an undisclosed sum of public money making all the preparations necessary to turn themselves into the "North-East Assembly Ltd", and also, for good measure, into "First North-East Ltd". Just one little step they overlooked: when they apply to Companies House they will find both companies already registered to a Mr N Herron of Sunderland.
In what George W Bush has described as a victory for "quiet diplomacy", referring to nine months of Anglo/US negotiations with the ex-rogue state, Bush and Blair jointly announced Libya's renouncement of WMD. Washington Times Report from here.
Final success could possibly have come from Gaddaffi, watching on TV that other dictator, looking like a hobo and being deloused in captivity. There was a period last week when even I had to abandon my obsessive regular TV news checks, unable to witness one more time the torch-lit recesses of Saddam's mouth.
We recommend this article from The Spectator'Its been a good year' by Mark Steyn, not just for his usual punchy content which includes this gem on a one-time blogger :-
But personally I find it heartening: if the Americans can’t transform Iraq into New Hampshire, this snotty little twerp is living proof that you can at least turn it into Islington.
....But also for the seasonally appropriate and funny cartoon.
EUBusiness has just filed this report on the Fisheries Deal, from which we quote the last two paragraphs:-
Spanish Fisheries Minister Miguel Arias Canete, whose country appeared to be the big winner of the all-night haggling, was visibly pleased as the ministers emerged into the grey light of Friday morning.
"The result is very satisfactory. We obtained increases on almost all species," he said, adding that the deal "should calm the Spanish fishing industry."
Read of the other countires more reasoned responses to this disaster here
Has Britain got a new Hilary Rodham in the making in the shape of Mrs Blair. First she hits out at Saudi Arabia as reported in Al Jazeera and then its the Pope's turn, as reported in The Daily Telegraphhere.
We obtained this noteworthy item, surprisingly enough from the Chinese News Agency Xinhuanet:
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) will build a training center for communicationtroops in Poland, Polish Deputy Defense Minister Janusz Zemke saidThursday.
Reuters has an interesting item on the Alliance which can be read here
EUobserver carries a report on this subject, linked here.
An interesting comparison of the US and EU proposed constitutions is linked here, Where Europe is wrong about its constitution by Robert McCrum originally in The Observer but reprinted in the Taipei Times
The EU, sole authority over Britain's once sovereign seas, has decided on the non-future of our fishermen as just reported in this from The Daily Telegraph
According to Dick Morris , speaking for the UK Independence Party to EPolitix, New Labour could lose the next election if they had Brown as leader. Read the report from here
This Blog can at least agree with this part of the Morris interview:
"I think it is the beginning of the internet age in American politics and the end of the media age.
Details of some of the charges may now be read from this link to Expatica:-
The welter of documents released in Los Angeles included a final settlement agreement between prosecutors and five French parties, including billionaire retail magnate Francois Pinault, a friend of President Jacques Chirac, and his holding company Artemis.
The deal also included a "criminal information" accusing Credit Lyonnais of illegally acquiring Executive Life through a series of front companies and then covering up the operation.
A spokesman for the prosecutor, US Attorney Debra Yang, said that document formed part of the deal under which the bank and the CDR accepted limited criminal responsibility in return for averting a trial that could have cost the bank its precious US banking licence.
This Blog has always suspected this was a Big Deal
The views on the Constitutional failure by the present British Minister for Europe appear today in The GuardianNo smell of a deal .
It was significant that his immediate predecessor the disgraced Keth Vaz who was similarly fanatical over Europe while in office, changed his tune on the eve of the final IGC meeting and joined those calling for a referendum.
Strangely, in view of her recent Fabian pamphlet he chooses to quote his fellow Labour MP Gisela Stuart 'there is no difference between Michael Howard and his predecessors when it comes to outright hostility to Europe' . Good thing too if it proves true!
This article from the Taipei Times gives a good summary of the present situation and outlook of the EU. We particularly liked the accompanying illustration which in our view is worth using the link for all on its own - European constitution out in the cold. The article concludes as follows:
Schroeder and Chirac may hope the financial leverage of the budget talks will force Spain and Poland to sue for peace on voting rights by 2005, but in such a poisoned atmosphere, that seems far from certain.
Exclusion of France and Germany from Iraqi Reconstruction
The Washington Times makes some valid points regarding James Baker's apparrent successes over the rescheduling of Iraqi debt. Who's the fool? Not this blog see our 11th December posts here and here.
The Daily Telegraph this morning reports on more Euro-Abuses, this time it is once again the MEP's, who outrageously have apparently voted themselves a huge salary increase while hanging on to their obscene expense allowance system. Read the entire report by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in Brussels below:
Euro-MPs get 30pc rise with no loss of perks
Euro-MPs awarded themselves a 30 per cent pay rise yesterday with no loss of their office perks.
Pay for British MEPs is to jump from £55,000 to £72,000 overnight, severing the link with their Westminster colleagues for the first time.
The new formula harmonises MEP salaries towards the highest level, whether they come from rich or poor countries.
Spain's MEPs will double their salaries. Hungarian or Latvian MEPs will rise into the top tier of Europe's elite when they join the EU next year while their national colleagues must limp along on £6,500 and £7,600 a year respectively.
Each MEP receives a tax-free £108,000 a year for staff expenses - used by almost half the British delegation to pay spouses, children and immediate kin, often doubling the family income.
A further £32,000 is wired into their accounts annually for "general expenses". Earmarked for paperclips, stamps, and such, it is in reality an extra bonus since the European Parliament's twin sites in Brussels and Strasbourg already provide free offices and computers.
MEPs also receive an attendance fee of £185 a day for showing up. Many amass £925 a week extra in cash.
The report in The Independent has the MEP's losing their expenses and points out that the deal is subject to EU Governments' approvals. It also states the UK Conservative MEPs abstained in the vote, Labour and the Lib-Dems backed the new deal. This article is linked from here. The report on the debate from the European Parliament can be read from here.
The Telegraph gives this summary of the Jack Straw Dublin speech that can be read in full from last evenings posting immediately below:-
Mr Straw said the declining level of public approval for the EU was a "welcome reality check" for anyone who thought the focus on EU institutions was a way of getting popular support for the European project.
BRITAIN AND IRELAND: STRONG PARTNERS IN AN EXPANDING EUROPE
In a speech to the Institute of European Affairs, in Dublin, on 16 December 2003, Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw spoke of Ireland's preparation for its sixth EU Presidency: 'Ireland is taking over the Presidency at a truly historic moment for Europe.' Mr Straw said that enlargement would bring great benefits to Britain, Ireland and Europe and described the EU as a union of sovereign nation states who have decided to pool some of that sovereignty to achieve objectives they could not achieve on their own. Speaking of the important tasks ahead for the EU, Mr Straw spoke of a 'core' or 'two speed' Europe and said: 'It is already the reality that there are different groups pursuing deeper cooperation in certain areas. I am convinced that Europe can work at twenty-five, twenty-seven, or twenty-eight. It should be our overriding objective to achieve this.' Speaking of Britain and Ireland, Mr Straw concluded by saying: 'Greater prosperity has made our partnership stronger. We now have the chance to push for economic reform across Europe.'
The EU has published Prodi's reply to a six nation request to cap EU spending at 1.0 rather than 1.24 per cent of GNP. Prodi states among other points:-
If the means attributed to the budget of the Union are not adequate, less will have to be done and some of these goals cannot be fulfilled.
As most if not all the money going to the EU is either wasted or corruptly diverted, the less handed over the better in my view. A 19.35 per cent budget cut is a good first step. Scrapping the lot would be better!
Failure may have impact on EU's long-term future' is the headline of a report in the financial daily. It quotes Klaus Hoensch, a European parliament representative at the intergovernmental conference on the constitution, as saying:
"While technically and legally the Union can function, from a political point of view confidence has been damaged and you can't make European policy without that confidence."
The Scotsman meanwhile reports a more traditional EU type of dispute, this time over butter, where New Zealand is accusing the EU of acting illegally. New Zealand May Challenge EU over Butter Curbs Unnaturally Britain under Blair will no doubt be siding with the Continentals once again!
The Independent this morning describes as 'instant vengeance' a request for budgetary restraint lodged with the Commission by Germany, Britain and others. Their article headlined 'Germany starts to exact revenge for summit collapse' goes on to say:
The message being sent by Germany is unmistakable. Berlin provides about one fifth of EU funding but is still bearing the costs of reunification.
Blair's statement to Parliament regarding the collapsed IGC and Constitution can be read from the link below, following his remarks on Saddam's capture.
The Nice Treaty will be what the EU now has to live with for the foreseeable future. Our readers might enjoy refreshing their memories of what that meant when it was hailed as a major victory by President Chirac a short three years ago. This link will take you to the report by The Economist magazine:
Ironically Defence Appears Best First Option for EU Core
This item in this evening's EUobserver dangles the fascinating proposition that defence would be the best area for the putative inner core to first proceed with enhanced cooperation. The Commission is already reported to be getting agitated over this prospect, although as the article makes clear.... Britain 'should' be unlikely to encourage such a course!
French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin told a newspaper he was "revolted" about having to consent to a settlement of the long-running U.S. Executive Life probe, according to this report from Forbes.com.
According to people we speak to in France this pretty well sums up the feelings of your typical French voter. Of course Raffarin's disgust is presumably at the waste of money to keep the full facts quiet, while for the general public the anger is at continuing to be kept in the dark.
Note particularly this statement:-
Raffarin, however, said a $770 million settlement, which also included French bank Credit Lyonnais and billionaire Francois Pinault, was justified in order to avoid a trial.
No wonder that the EU Commission delayed release of the Autumn 2003 Eurobarometer Opinion Poll until after the weekend summit. It opens with the following statement:-
1. An increasingly pessimistic background
1.1 Citizens' expectations for the year 2004
Citizens' expectations are going down a path that is marked by pessimism which increases rather than decreases with time .
Some of the highlights are quoted below. The report can be accessed in pdf format from this link.
(For the summary of results merely print Page 19).
"The gap is closing between those who consider that their country has benefited from its membership in the European Union and those who believe the contrary (46%, -4 against 34%, +5). Those in the latter group have extended their hold in virtually every country, with the exception of Greece, Ireland and Spain. The most worrying trends are those to be seen in the Netherlands (+15), Italy (+13), Belgium (+8), France and Finland (+7 each)."
The UK Results for the UK with changes since the Spring survey in brackets were:-
Trust in Commission 26 (-3)
Membership Good Thing 28 (-2)
Benefit from Membership 30 (-2)
Support for Single Currency 23 (-1)
Support for enlargement 38 (+2)
Support Common Foreign Policy 35 (-2)
Support Common Defence and Security Policy 48 (+1)
Support EU Constitution 48 (-4)
The biigest swings in each category by country and scale were:
Trust in Commission Denmark Down 11
Membership Good Thing Germany Down 13
Benefit from Membership Holland Down 11
Support for Single Currency Italy Down 12
Support for enlargement Luxembourg Down 8
Support Common Foreign Policy Sweden Down 7
Support Common Defence and Security Policy Sweden Down 12
Support EU Constitution Sweden/Portugal Down 6
Most eye-grabbing number for me, just look at that 13 per cent fall off in the number of Germans considering Membership of the EU as a good thing over the past six months. Down 13 to well under half the total at 46 per cent!
Several commentators, including this blog, have tended to assume that Blair's enthusiasm for the provisions and directions of the document drawn up in the Convention led by Valery Giscard d'Estaing were motivated by his possible ambitions to fill the presidential office it envisioned.
The apparent total disregard of his government for the historical democratic rights and individual freedoms of the people of this country, including the gross misrepresentation of the nature of the proposed treaty by his Foreign Secretary and himself to Parliament, left little other logical explanation. Suspecting such duplicity as being solely driven by personal ambition is one thing, but suspicion is what it would normally have to remain when dealing with the inner desires of another man.
Extraordinarily, however, in the statement issued by Number 10 of the press conference delivered by Blair and Straw, following the breakdown of the IGC, we now have more or less concrete evidence in the Prime Minister's own words that such is indeed his ambition.
Among what is mostly incomprehensible double talk, if not at times just plain gobbledegook, is this statement:
I don't think in the near term it is going to be a dramatic problem, but I think as time goes on, unless Europe has a really effective way of working, and I think that means that you need a full time coordinator of these Council meetings, you know you can see with what has happened today and in the past few days, I mean the Italian Presidency has performed heroics, but it is difficult for them, each successor country to take that on, so I think there are areas there where in time it will be extremely important, for Europe to operate effectively, that we have this new agreement.
It could perhaps be argued that the Prime Minister is merely suggesting any competent coordinator or President could fill such a role, but that case for me is weak. To argue a negotiation failed for the lack of something only a successful outcome could deliver is somewhat disingenuous. The point being made also seems to me irrelevant to the question asked, indicating this was the item already at the forefront of Blair's mind. What Blair said boils down in essence to this: 'Europe can't work without a strong leader' Blair as PM sees himself as such. No strong leader envisages himself working for another - Blair must therefore consider himself as the man to lead the EU.
In my view, therefore, to create an EU Presidential Post became Blair's principal objective and the remaining constitutional treaty terms under which the people of Britain and all other nation states in Europe would lose many of their democratic rights became matters of minor importance.
I believe that it is up to the people of Britain who have seen their own institutions of government and political conventions despoiled by this self-driven, but otherwise directionless man, to ensure he is exposed and removed from power before he has further opportunity to coordinate a similar fate for the whole of Europe. Hutton and other looming difficulties happily make this appear an increasingly practical proposition.
Britain, to my mind, certainly cannot afford a resumption of constitutional negotiations while its negotiating team is headed by one who so obviously displays his own personal agenda lies with the 'opposing' side.
The BBC carried a reasoned look at the collapsed IGC in its report EU: Two speeds ahead? by Paul Reynolds.
How would such a two speed Europe, or faster motor as President Chirac described it, or 'inner core' as it has recently been known, have to operate? What common institutions could it utilise and would all have to pay or just the inner group?
The Nice Treaty provisions on 'Enhanced Co-operation' will presumably be what govern and we re-print them below for ease of reference.
Quote
‚Article 27a
1. Enhanced cooperation in any of the areas referred to in this Title shall be aimed at safe-
guarding the values and serving the interests of the Union as a whole by asserting its identity as a coherent force on the international scene. It shall respect:
* the principles, objectives, general guidelines and consistency of the common foreign and security policy and the decisions taken within the framework of that policy;
* the powers of the European Community, and
* consistency between all the Union's policies and its external activities.
2. Articles 11 to 27 and Articles 27b to 28 shall apply to the enhanced cooperation provided for in this Article, save as otherwise provided in Article 27c and Articles 43 to 45.
Article 27b
Enhanced cooperation pursuant to this Title shall relate to implementation of a joint action or a common position. It shall not relate to matters having military or defence implications.
Article 27c
Member States which intend to establish enhanced cooperation between themselves under Article 27b shall address a request to the Council to that effect.
The request shall be forwarded to the Commission and to the European Parliament for information.
The Commission shall give its opinion particularly on whether the enhanced cooperation proposed is consistent with Union policies. Authorisation shall be granted by the Council, acting in accordance with the second and third subparagraphs of Article 23(2) and in compliance with Articles 43 to 45.
Article 27d
Without prejudice to the powers of the Presidency or of the Commission, the Secretary-General of the Council, High Representative for the common foreign and security policy, shall in particular ensure that the European Parliament and all members of the Council are kept fully informed of the implementation of enhanced cooperation in the field of the common foreign and security policy.
Article 27e
Any Member State which wishes to participate in enhanced cooperation established in accordance with Article 27c shall notify its intention to the Council and inform the Commission. The Commission shall give an opinion to the Council within three months of the date of receipt of that notification. Within four months of the date of receipt of that notification, the Council shall take a decision on the request and on such specific arrangements as it may deem necessary. The decision shall be deemed to be taken unless the Council, acting by a qualified majority within the same period, decides to hold it in abeyance; in that case, the Council shall state the reasons for its decision and set a deadline for re-examining it.
For the purposes of this Article, the Council shall act by a qualified majority. The qualified majority shall be defined as the same proportion of the weighted votes and the same proportion of the number of the members of the Council concerned as those laid down in the third subparagraph of Article 23(2).
Unquote
The following is the agreed voting procedure according to the Nice Treaty that will now prevail for the foreseeable future:-
Quote
THE WEIGHTING OF VOTES IN THE COUNCIL
Members of the Council Weighted votes
Germany 29
United Kingdom 29
France 29
Italy 29
Spain 27
Poland 27
Romania 14
Netherlands 13
Greece 12
Czech Republic 12
Belgium 12
Hungary 12
Portugal 12
Sweden 10
Bulgaria 10
Austria 10
Slovakia 7
Denmark 7
Finland 7
Ireland 7
Lithuania 7
Latvia 4
Slovenia 4
Estonia 4
Cyprus 4
Luxembourg 4
Malta 3
Total 345
Acts of the Council shall require for their adoption at least 258 votes in favour, cast by a majority of members, where this Treaty requires them to be adopted on a proposal from the Commission.
In other cases, for their adoption acts of the Council shall require at least 258 votes in favour cast by at least two-thirds of the members.
When a decision is to be adopted by the Council by a qualified majority, a member of the Council mayrequest verification that the Member States constituting the qualified majority represent at least 62 % ofthe total population of the Union. If that condition is shown not to have been met, the decision in question shall not be adopted.
Unquote
The requirement of 'Nice' for 258 out of 345 total votes is a percentage vote of 74.78 per cent plus 62 per cent of total population . A much higher hurdle than the proposed double majority 60 per cent championed by VGdE, which would have effectively allowed the Commission and small inner core of countries to have become a legislative steamroller.
This is a major defeat for those pushing a corporatist and non-democratic future for the EU. Much comment today has said the failure was on a matter of 'voting' technicalities. We believe the above table disproves that assertion.
The following is the Press Conference statement as issued from Downing Street. Click Here
Meantime EU Business covers the opening shots in the 'Blame Game' now about to engulf Europe.
At this crucial time for the EU....the Europa Web Site has nothing whatever on recent events. When the statement to the press on the collapse is available it will be posted here. Struck Dumb?
This really is turning out to be a weekend to savour. On top of the collapse of the EU Constitutional Council Meeting, we now learn that Saddam Hussein has been captured.
While it is always best to be cautious about events in the Middle East, there must now be much greater cause to hope for the future of the people of Iraq, just as yesterday's events in Brussels inevitably brighten the prospects for all in Europe!
The following quote is from the concluding paragraph of today's Leading Article in 'The Sunday Telegraph':-
"For the Euro-elites, what matters is the process itself. They have almost forgotten the original declared purposes - peace, prosperity and so forth - in their determination to integrate, always and everywhere. They are almost like the apparatchiks of the Eastern bloc in the late 1980s, who had long since stopped believing in the principles of Marxism-Leninism, but who kept going because they did not know what else to do - and who were able to get away with it, too, by ignoring popular opinion. Eventually, the desire for national democracy caught up with them. Sooner or later, it will do for the Euro-elites, too."
One of the best social writers in Britain today, has a tendency in my view to also be one of the most depressing to read. Prison Doctor Theodore Dalrymple often comes upon such sorry specimens of humanity, and not only on his prison visits, that even starting his various columns requires a certain screwing up of courage. I was therefore a little taken aback at the title of his piece this week in The Spectator: Reasons to be cheerful.
The Sunday Telegraph has this as its main item on the failed summit. The article can be read from here. We quote the thrust of the article here:
In private, Jacques Chirac, the French president, blamed Britain for not supporting the Franco-German position. Publicly, he indicated that a hard core or "pioneer group" of states would push ahead with European integration regardless of how the new members of the EU behaved
Anyone listening to the statement by EU President Berlusconi at the Press Conference following the breakdown will have been been totally disabused of the idea that the Constitution represented anything other than full European Federation, certainly from an Italian viewpoint. His description of what had potentially been lost made Jack Straw's protestations to Parliament completely absurd!
Will Germany and France seek to use the ratification process of the Accession Treaty as a lever against the Poles? The link below shows that according to the EU Commission, neither of these two major countries have yet to lodge their ratification of the Treaty:-
That was the assessment of Richard Gowan Europe Analyst interviewed on BBC World this afternoon following the summit's collapse. One thing it proves he said "Donald Rumsfeld knows his Europe".
According to EU Politix "The row was such that other key points, such as the scope of EU decision-making and the role of a European 'foreign minister', never even made it on to the agenda."
German State Broadcaster Deutsche Welle reports: Germany and France have refused to give in on the matter and said they would rather postpone adoption of the entire document until a later date rather than approving pieces of it. Read their coverage in full by clicking here.
Surely all of Europe whether 'Old' or 'New' must by now be getting tired of the constant wrecking tactics of the Franco/German duo. More probably Poland and Spain will receive the public blame!
This Reuters report cofirms the IGC Breakdown and can be read by clicking here.
Leaders are discussing a communique to be issued after lunch, detailing areas where progress was made. It ends as follows:-
Diplomats said negotiations on the constitution treaty -- deadlocked by irreconcilable differences over the voting system -- would be postponed but there was no precise timetable for their resumption.""
Such is the Breaking Headline News from BBC World at this hour. The Poles are reported to be leaving Brussels. This is fantastic news for all the ordinary people of the entire Continent of Europe. More details will be posted when available
Poland and Spain continue to stand firm on their positions over voting rights as covered in the linked reports by EU Business. Indeed Spain declares itself perfectly happy if no further proposals are received, quite rightly being more than happy to maintain the already agreed voting structures through to 2009 as agreed in the Nice Treaty:
"We don't need any proposals. We're very happy with what we've got at the moment, which we have until 2009. If things remain as we are now we are delighted." a Spanish Diplomat is reported as saying.
A Federalist's View on the IGC and a Labour Rebellion?
This interview with John Palmer, Political Director of the European Policy Centre broadcast in Australia this morning can be read from this link. Crisis looms over new European constitution.
A fairly unenlightening debate between Norman Lamont and Jean Luc Dehane on the lack of progress at the constitution broadcast on Radio Four's Today's programme as soon as it is available.
Tony Blair was hit by another Labour backbench rebellion last night when 31 of his MPs demanded a referendum on the proposed new constitution for the European Union.
IN a gross abuse of power, armed Belgian police trample over one of the basic tenets of democracy.
The right of peaceful protest.
There can be no more monstrous infringement of free speech than the arrest of Britons calling for the right to vote on the EU Constitution.
While the politicians haggle over the masterplan that laughably purports to be upholding democracy, the truth is out there for all to see on the streets of Brussels.
Those who dare stand in the way of the EU steamroller get flattened.
Would anyone be arrested over a banner urging that the constitution becomes law without delay?
Not on your life.
There is a radically different justice system on the Continent, where guilt is assumed, not innocence.
You can be deported for daring to hold an opinion in public.
Especially if it disagrees with that of the dictators of the European superstate.
The arrest in Brussels of three innocent British leaflet distributors (see my posting immediately below) should be all the further proof Europe's Presidents, Prime Ministers, Foreign Ministers and other leading figures could need of the monstrous non-democratic nature of the institution they are now gathered together to create. If they pause long enough to register the enormity of this incident they should immediately adjourn their meeting and return to their countries while still they may!
The reputed 'Father of Modern Journalism', William Stead, was as far as I can find, the first known creator of the term United States of Europe as long ago as1880.
Nineteen years later he asked this question about the 'Europe' that might one day be created:-
......the germ of the United States of Europe, and to develop the concerted action of six Powers in relation to the question of the East into a Federated Union of all the European States. It may perhaps be well worth while to form some idea of this new organic entity which it is the first object of our foreign policy to create. Are we repeating the crime of Frankenstein, or are we fashioning, like Pygmalion, a beautiful creature into which at the appointed time the gods will breathe the breath of life? In other words, what is this Europe whose United States we are seeking to federate?
The European Union now part formed and under completion in Brussels this weekend, is clearly the Frankenstein of Stead's nightmare, rather than the peaceful benign entity for which he hoped when writing Europa in 1899. More of Stead's book can be read from this link.
The democracies and freedoms of almost five hundred million people lie at stake this weekend!
The fuller report on this incident can be read from this link.
British campaigners arrested
EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Three activists from the UK Vote 2004 campaign were arrested by Belgian police and will be deported out of Belgium tomorrow (13 December).
The three men were handing out leaflets from a van at Place Luxembourg near the EU institutions in Brussels where the European heads of states are negotiating the final details of a new European Constitution.
The leaflets were demanding a referendum on the new European Constitution.
The activists were arrested for not having the necessary paperwork to demonstrate in Brussels.
One of the British activists told the EUobserver - from a police car - that he believed an application to demonstrate needs to be lodged with the mayor of Brussels five days in advance of the intended date. This had not been done.
They are to be released this evening and will have to spend the night in Calais before being deported back to Britain tomorrow morning.
A spokesman from Vote 2004 told the EUobserver that Mr Blair had been informed of the incident.
Neil O Brien, the campaign director, said, "This is disgraceful. All we are asking for is a right to have a say and they are trying to stifle our right to free speech with hardball tactics".
We have chosen this link to a Norther Ireland News Source to bring Blair's Lies on the defence agreement to readers of this blog. Northern Ireland is used to the double-dealing deceitfulness of this British Prime Minister and the despair that follows in its wake!
Rather than quote the Prime Minister who has lost any ability to recognise the truth, we pick these quotes:
the Tory Shadow Foreign Secretary Michael Ancram was quick to dismiss the agreement as a "sell out".
“The agreement on an autonomous planning cell for a European military capability is a dangerous step along the road to a single European state," he said.
“The Prime Minister has sold out to those in Europe who wish to undermine Nato and rival the United States. This agreement is yet another reason why this Constitution should be stopped in its tracks or the British people should be allowed to have their say in a Referendum.”
It is now more important than ever that this agreement never be enacted!
Europe Creates Military Planning Unit Separate From NATO
Such is the heading of an article in the New York Times marking Tony Blair's perfidy. No link available as it is subscription only, we regret. The tone of the article, needless to say is sombre!
According to this report, just in from the Italian Press Agency: 'AGI' EU President Berlusconi is depending on a majority vote to solve the differences in a forum that requires unanimity. We quote:-
EU IGC: BERLUSCONI, NO PROMISES BUT THERE IS A POSSIBILITY
(AGI) - Brussels, Dec. 12 - Shortly before the opening of the general meeting of the EU summit on the Intergovernmental Conference Silvio Berlusconi did not make any promises about the outcome of the negotiations. "I am not making any promises , I never did", he said on his way back to the Justus Lipsius Palce after some bilateral meetings in the Conrad Hotel. "We verified the single positions", he continued, "there is a certain opening to the positions of the others, now we will see". "I reckon - added the premier - that everybody thinks that we are moving forwards and that in the end we will vote on the final solution". Berlusconi believes that "everybody is willing to look for a compromise that should be a compromise that leads to a Europe that will work and that can take decisions". (AGI)
Washington Times Devastatingly Summarises EU Hypocrisy
Delphine Soulas and David R. Sands writing for the Washington Times amplify the underlying duplicity behind the attempts to change the Nice voting procedures that this blog has tried to convey in some previous postings. Read the full article from the link below:
Guardian Garbage on the deeper meaning of EU Defence
Hard to believe as it may be, rationale for the nonsense of the EU Defence arrangement has been conjured up by this writer for a once fine newspaper: "EU aims to secure better world"
Italy hopes Blair, who has close ties to the Spanish and Polish leaders, might help to pressure the two countries to compromise in return for acceptance of Britain's "red lines" of keeping a national veto on tax, foreign and justice policy.
Such are the dirty, double-dealings that the EU represents. If an agreement is reached, only one thing is certain: The people of europe are the losers!
EU Business reports that the brochure prepared by the popular British tabloid is freely available in Brussels.....and obviously causing something of a stir. They particularly seemed to like this particular translation of Eurospeak:
Thus, for example, "The Union shall provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives" becomes, in Sun-talk, "The EU can tax and raise money for its bureaucracy, limos, lunches and jobs for the boys".
On another issue, the leaders also agreed to consider lifting the arms embargo imposed on China after Beijing's bloody 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square.
The European Union has repeatedly called on China to improve its human rights policies.
Surely all regular 'Ironies' readers knew that the headline of this post could not have been on anything significant!
Note 'they' only agreed to consider a matter that ceased to be of interest to the rest of the world some considerable time ago. Are the EU member countries not represented on the IOC that awarded the Olympics to Beijing???....Eurodynamism at work....just wait until we have two Presidents and multi-role QVM Foreign Ministers!
This report in English from Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung illustrates that Germany seems to be entering the final Constitutional meeting with no plans of their compromising whatsoever. The biggest problem, described by the Presidency as 'the rock on which the treaty might founder', is the fact that three years ago the German Chancellor freely agreed to having the same votes in the European Council as France. He also agreed to Spain and Poland having a mere TWO wieghted votes less.
Unbelievably the German electorate decided to reconfirm this Chancellor in his position for another term of office, well after this incompetence was known and accepted across Europe. The referenda and decisions to enter the EU by the ten new countries were taken on the basis of the Nice Agreement. The position now being taken by Germany to renege on this agreement, and the backing it is receiving from many of the existing EU members is quite deplorable.
Any backdown by Spain and Portugal will be abhorrent to the thinking citizens of Europe, and be just one further disaster to be laid at the door of the present Franco/German duopoly.
One would have considered the destruction of the Growth and Stability Pact would have been error enough! Rather than re-consider, repent or recant - I have just heard on the BBC 6 o'clock Radio 4 Evening News President Chirac saying "Our Spanish and Polish friends must accept democracy....." in French indeed and therefore quite incroyable!
Dutch Prepared to Scupper Summit for Stability Pact?
A report from Radio Netherlands, title "Daggers Drawn at EU Summit" which can be read in full from here, reports that :
The Dutch delegation is now pressing for guarantees to be included in the constitution to ensure that countries will comply with agreed budget rules in the future.
The Italian presidency presented a compromise to solve the matter, but the Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende on Thursday rejected the proposal as insufficient. Both the Dutch government and parliament insist that the Stability Pact rules have to be taken seriously and therefore must be implemented, he said.
Rumours have it that the Dutch Prime Minister is prepared for a tough fight with Germany and might even call for the whole summit to be postponed until next year if no agreement is reached on the Stability Pact.
A Reuters report filed on the opening of the summit and describing the meeting as being plunged into gloom, states that Germany has rejected this Dutch approach:-
But Germany and the Netherlands squared up for a fight over budget rules, with Berlin rejecting a Dutch proposal for enforcement of the regime in the European Court of Justice.
"It's a very important issue and we want to have a result," Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende told reporters.
Sun's Anti-EU Brochure Scattered Around Council Venue
Reuters reports that The Sun Brochure referenced on all our blogs earlier today, was scattered around the European Council venue to let delegates know that at least the British People no longer have an excuse to claim complete innocence of the huge deception and destruction of their democracies that their leaders now plan to inflict upon the almost all the peoples of Europe. Read their report from here
Straw's Posturing on Today in response to Vaz's Referendum Support
Ex- Minister for Europe and Eurofanatic par excellence Keith Vaz Labour MP for Leicester East was to be heard on Radio 4 this morning supporting a British Referendum on the EU Constitution now entering final consideration in Brussels. A written report of Straw's inadequate response can be read here and an audio link to hear the programme can be obtained by clicking the link below:
BUY THE SUN TODAY,BUY THE SUN TODAY BUY THE SUN TODAY, BUY THE SUN TODAY, BUY THE SUN TODAY, BUY THE SUN TODAY, BUY THE SUN TODAY, BUY THE SUN TODAY, BUY THE SUN TODAY.
The absolute MUST purchase today is The Sun Newspaper. It contains a free booklet with the title "EUROPE"S SECRET PLAN - SHACKLE BRITAIN"
The Scotsman carries an item that reports US approval is about to be forthcoming for the defence plan being promoted by Germany, France and (to its shame) Britain. Read from here.
EU Business reports Nato Head George Robertson as the source for this optimism, (the previous link seems to be based on briefings from Blair's official spokesman). Read "NATO set to accept European defence plans, announcement expected" We quote Lord Robertson below:
"If it is clear this is not a permanent establishement but simply the reinforcement of national sectors then I think not only could we live with that but it could be advantagoeus," he told a small group of journalists.
Reuters carries a more complete report that can be read from here. A quote from this latter clearly shows that Blair has been out-manouevered by the EU once again (or perhaps deliberately disregarded his US Ally and Nation's Defence Interests for his own purposes):
A diplomat from one of the EU countries keenest to establish an independent military headquarters voiced satisfaction nevertheless that the heavily circumscribed planning cell would grow into something much bigger over time.
"Give the plant some water and it will grow and eventually become too big for that little pot," the diplomat said.
EU Commission Press Release on Iraq Reconstruction
The terms of the Press Release are quoted in full below. As EU president Berlusconi has stated he has no problem with the US position. the question is who authorised this statement and with what authority?
It reads as follows:
Quote
IP/03/1713
Brussels, 11 December 2003
EU-US: Commission urges US to reconsider Iraq reconstruction contracts decision
The European Commission deeply regrets the decision of the United States to exclude countries that did not participate in the war in Iraq from US reconstruction contracts. This decision is difficult to accept and unjustified. Furthermore, it is a political mistake because it sends a most unhelpful signal at a time when the international community is constructively working on making of Iraq an open,transparent, democratic and prosperous country.
This is no time to reopen old wounds – but to focus on making concrete progress towards that objective.
As requested at the Madrid Conference on Reconstruction in October 2003, we urge all donors to Iraq – including the US – to apply open, transparent and non-discriminatory contracting procedures. We therefore hope the US will reconsider the decision announced yesterday.
The Commission will examine the 26 contracts at stake to determine whether procurement restrictions are in line with the commitments undertaken by the United States in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Government Procurement Agreement (GPA).
We also call on the US Administration itself to re-examine the WTO compatibility aspects before proceeding with this ill thought out action. We do not need another WTO dispute at this time.
EU President Berlusconi calls US Decision on Iraq Logical
Finally some sense from somebody with a role in the EU, albeit only for a further 20 days. This EU Business item reports Berlusconi as saying:-
"It seems to me that Bush has said he would be happy to have this possibility of collaboration if countries that have so far held back from collaborating (militarily) decide to do so," he told reporters here.
"It's quite logical," he said, as EU leaders began to gather for two-day summit talks starting Friday.
Its helpful to see these continuing examples of how Qualified Majority Voting in Defence or Foreign Affairs can never work in this disfunctional so-called union, especially at this critical moment.
First the Poles get it from the German Chancellor, this quote from EU Business:-
"You can't want to be a new member of the European Union and want to announce your arrival with a veto," he told ARD public television. .....
Kwasniewski has warned that Warsaw could veto the proposed new EU constitution if Poland's voting powers are downgraded.
Then this headline "Schroeder blasts US over Iraq rebuilding" in this piece from
Middle East Online, we quote:-
"This is a task for all, and I emphasise all, that want or can be involved," he told reporters in Berlin after talks with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.
"It does not make sense at all to discuss who should be involved and who should potentially not be involved in any reconstruction effort," Schroeder said.
If it were German troops being daily killed in Iraq, and German taxpayers' eighteen billion dollars being spent for reconstruction; I wonder what Schroeder's position would be towards an America that had adopted a similar position of late as have France and Germany! (And the EU)? Just a thought.
Retiring Canadian Prime Minister is reported as saying that Canada will not have a problem over Iraqi reconstruction contracts, according to this item just out from Canada.com.
''He thanked me for what we're doing in Afghanistan and for the offer of money in the reconstruction of Iraq,'' Chretien told a news conference.
Chretien said Bush assured him that recent news reports on the exclusion of Canada, and other countries that did not support the U.S.-led war in Iraq, from reconstruction contracts were not correct.
''He was telling me basically not to worry, so I said 'thank you.'''
Maybe Chirac and Schroeder should try a call to George W, before dragging the EU into something that is none of their business, as pointed out in the post below.
EU Commissioner Patten, talking to CNN today on behalf of the EU, again criticised the USA. The problem, the US decision on disbursing the eighteen billion dollars of US taxpayers money for Iraqi reconstruction, only to countries contributing armed forces to the Coalition.
Patten built upon his criticism of yesterday, highlighted in this EU Business Reort, by stating that it would make his task of raising more than the already agreed EU contribution of two hundred million euros from the EU parliament as a result of this decision.
George Bush from the White House today confirmed the decision was administration policy, not just a Pentagon decision as was sometimes being surmised in Europe.
In considering the actions of the External Relation's Commissioner, it is useful to consider this statement by US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld contained in the latest briefing from the European Foundation Intelligence Digest No 182 readable in full from here:-
Donald Rumsfeld has again attacked the notion that "Europe" is the equivalent of the "old" Franco-German EU. In an interview with the FAZ he ridiculed the idea that "Europe" acted only when France waves the flag and says it is Europe. "Europe is in Iraq," said Rumsfeld, "and I'll tell you which European Nato states are not in Iraq: Iceland, Belgium, France and Germany. Is that Europe? All the others are there, 18 out of 26 present and future members of Nato!" Rumsfeld was trying to prove that America is not alone in Iraq, and that Europe remains its ally. He said that the countries which were not militarily involved had their own reasons - "and we respect them". [Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger,
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 4th December 2003]
This is a huge opportunity for the European Council meeting this weekend. The EU is rushing off, investigating the legality of the US action as regards the WTO and who knows what else, without any authorisation at all as far as I have seen reported, never mind the unanimity supposedly still required for foreign policy matters.
All this purely in the interests of France and Germany. Is it not time the EU Commission were made aware that they represent and are paid for by countries other than this posturing pair. This weekend's European Council presents a perfect opportunity.
One fact for the negotiators to keep clearly in mind this weekend. Written agreements and legailities seem to hold no meaning for France, Germany or the Commission. Witness this example, or even the Growth and Stability pact. The Foreign Ministers and Heads of Government might well begin to wonder if they might not be better having a weekend at home with their families. I am sure the people of Europe would be; if only they were!
On the eve of the EU Constitutional (planned to be ) concluding European Council meeting the Commission issued this report on its press conference. Mostly it carries no surprises, being a plea for ever more bureaucracy, centralisation, supra-nationalism, qualified voting etc.etc. One portion that will not be welcomed by the British (particularly Gordon Brown) is this:-
Decisions must be taken by a qualified majority in trade and social policy as well as on certain tax issues.
Separately the European Court of Auditors has issued its own request to the European Council (click here) requesting it be given the same status as other EU bodies and have its own budget.
Germany appears to continue to use a threat to proceed with an inner core of countries as its main negotiating ploy ahead of this weekend's intended wind-up of the IGC. The Polish President in Berlin to meet Schroeder and Fischer stated his position to the TV cameras as follows:-
We were right to fight for our independence!
We were right to fight the communists!
We are right to fight for 'good equilibrium' in Europe!
The Polish threat (read EUobserver here) to veto the whole EU Constitutional process is, however, merely the gravest of many similar tests to the whole process, that lie ahead this weekend.
Few expect Blair, (with his mind presumably preoccupied with the Presidential opportunities a signed deal will offer) to make many waves. Fudges will no doubt be sufficient to blur his red lines into invisibility against the background of the bloodier battles newcomers such as the Poles seem prepared to offer. Their memories of living under tyranny are so fresh that we must hope they can save their pampered neighbours of Western Europe from sleep-walking into this potential totalitarian nightmare.
Associated Press earlier today reported that criminal indictments were about to be opened against the French State and others over the scandal this blog has been following for some months. Following that CNN International has just reported that settlement has now been reached for a record sum of seven hundred and fifty million dollars. We will post the 'final' details when available. AP Report Also read more here, and from the FT reporting $770 million here.
"Should the United Kingdom adopt the euro as its currency?"
Various media carry reports this morning of Britain's proposed Referendum question (see this post's title above) on the now almost entirely irrelevant question of the single European Currency, the Euro.
This link is to the article in the Financial TimesUK Unveils Euro Question. The Daily Telegraph in its article states that such a referendum might be combined with a general election, 'Toby Helm, Chief Political Correspondent', while that same paper's leading article slates the constitutional document, as can be read from this link to 'Wretched EU document'.
Press Release from the Shadow Chancellor (Bruges Group)
Subject: Statement by Oliver Letwin, MP to the Bruges Group
Honorary President: The Rt Hon. the Baroness Thatcher, LG, OM, FRS
Co-Chairmen: Dr Brian Hindley & The Rt Hon. the Lord Lamont of Lerwick
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
THE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF THE EU CONSTITUTION
The Rt Hon. Oliver Letwin, MP
Oliver Letwin, MP, Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, speaking at a Bruges Group seminar on the economic consequences of the EU Constitution.
Shadow Chancellor Oliver Letwin warned that,
"The European Union Constitution contains clauses which could give the EU significant powers to control economic policy in member-states that are NOT within the eurozone and also contains a threat to the continuation of our rebate. These are further reasons for resisting adoption by Britain of the Constitution and for insisting on a referendum"
Oliver Letwin also said that the European Constitution represents the EU signing itself a blank cheque regarding the payments made by member states to the EU Budget.
"I would expect that the European Court of Justice would interpret Article 153 as allowing the European Union to decide the level of its own resources without limit."
Letwin told the meeting of the Bruges Group yesterday.
"This is pregnant with possibilities for Britain our well known budget rebate is one of the issues related to the European Union's 'own resources.' "
But Letwin also predicted that the Government would be defeated by the House of Lords if it attempted to ratify the Treaty without agreeing to a Referendum.
"The Liberal Democrats may be all for it but at least they have accepted that it is more than a 'tidying up exercise' and should be subject to a Referendum."
Letwin declared.
"Many cross benches and Labour peers also agree, so I think the Government will find it extraordinary difficult, it not impossible, to get the measure through the Lords in this session. So then they would face having to rail roll it through in a year's time just before a General Election using the Parliament Act. I doubt they would want to do that particularly when we will be making sure millions are people are mobilised to express their opposition to it."
Foreign Office Press Release with full Straw Statement
Click on this bizarre 'supposed' statement of intent to read the full presentation:-
"It should confirm that the Union exercises only those powers which are explicitly and freely conferred on it by the member states, which remain the EU's primary source of democratic legitimacy.' I said the new treaty should 'draw a clear distinction between supranational and national competences'
AS in all recent Straw statements there is a fatal flaw at its heart, in this statement it is contained in this clear misrepresentation:
The treaty will be not a federalist blueprint but the framework for a Europe of sovereign nation states working together to achieve common aims and combat shared challenges.
Any who have read the treaty, or any reasonable summary, grasped the full implications of the so-called 'rights', or even become aware of how all earlier such treaties have turned out to encroach upon national sovereignty to a far greater extent than any British negotiators either recognised or indeed initially suspected, will know only too well how hollow those words ring.
This Constitution can never exist with the strength of law behind it in any country that could ever justifiably consider itself a still to be 'sovereign state'. The EU Constitution, if enacted will be a sweeping victory for supranationalism and the end of this nation. Blair and Straw know that only too well, as do all the other parlimentarians at Westminster today.
The Scotsman (as seems to be increasingly the case) has the earliest coverage of the Foreign Secretary's statement on the EU Constitution linked from here.
As is also becoming increasingly frequent, Straw's statement contains a gobsmacker! This time it is this:-
"Mr Straw has warned his colleagues that the UK will not sign up to anything unacceptable to the British people".
Given the fact that he and Blair have made it absolutely and repeatedly clear that they will not grant the British people a say - in the only way possible - BY A REFERENDUM, this statement must take the biscuit! How for heaven's sake does he now intend to find out?????
After last weekend's television pictures of French President Chirac cosying up to Libya's Colonel Gaddaffi in Tunisia, we now have this news of the EU Commission reaching a deal on behalf of the entire EU with Syria. Read the report from EUobserver.
Again on the Trans-Atlantic divide, France and Germany have been reported on TV to be investigating legal remedies to their exclusion from the Iraqi re-building contracts. A Washington Post item on the same subject describes the matter as being an EU matter.
EU Business now reports that the EU President has a plan to resolve the voting problem that looked likely to stymie matters with Poland/Spain pitched against France/Germany. NB It is the former two countries who are expected to concede however:-
"I have a proposal I believe in that recognises Spain and Poland's big-country status," Berlusconi told reporters.
"I will issue it at the last minute and we will see if the two countries accept it," he said, without elaborating.
Downing Street this morning confirmed the meetings detailed earlier and indicated that in spite of the heavy December schedule, Blair's health could withstand the pace. Pity in a way, the weekend's meetings would seem tailor-made for the Deputy Prime-Minister's style of Diplomacy. Read details from here.
The Portuguese Foreign Minister is meanwhile reported by EU Business as saying the original deadline for agreement of this weekend is no longer important. The report may be read from this link but concentrates on the size of the Commission. Germany was reported today as suggesting that the larger countries revert to having two commissioners each if the slimmed-down Commission does not go through. This issue was the first where agreement had been reported to be close at the very beginning of the IGC process. Things really are regressing at present.
We will post Straw's Westminster comments when received. Are more lies ahead?
Blair Plans to be Well Fed as he Finally Sells Out his Country
EU Business reports that 'Betrayer Blair', will dine with EU President Berlusconi, tomorrow evening before the start of the crucial IGC, which Blair plans will bring to a close our long history of being independent Sovereign States within this Archipelago of Britain.
This 'Iniquitous Last Supper" will be followed the very next morning by breakfast with the two arch-schemers Gerhard Shroeder of Germany and Jaques Chirac of France who are mainly jointly responsible for the present common perception of the EU in the wider world as a totally single-currency obsessed, navel-gazing, free-trade detesting, US denigrating, third-world oppressing, WTO disseminating, democracy decerebrating and mankind degrading rich man's club.
Latest EU Presidency Proposals on the Constitution
A covering statement to the proposed amendments can be obtained in pdf format by clicking this LINK. The detailed proposals seem to have been only made available principally in the French Language, even from the English Language Home Page of the Presidency as can be accessed from this Link. We will post the full English version as soon as possible. See the EU at work! Here is an example with one section in English namely Page 30:
Declaration for incorporation in the Final Act The Conference confirms that Member States may negotiate and conclude agreement with third countries or international organisations in the domains covered by Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Chapter IV of Title III of Part III of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe insofar as such agreements comply with Union law.
Read it, think about and consider "Why would any state voluntarily restrict its future freedoms by agreeing to such a obligation". Any State at any time should be free to enter into any new agreement with any other State it then sees fit EVEN IF such new Treaty or Agreement conflicts with an existing Treaty or Obligation - Because that is the essence of National Sovereignty WHICH CANNOT BE FETTERED.
Injured Polish PM set to 'Stiffen Resistance at IGC'
The mysterious helicopter crash that could have killed the Polish Prime Minister Miller was described in a report from Yahoo as follows:-
"Polish army spokesman Zbigniew Gniatowski told the same news conference an official inquiry into the incident was expected to take from two to three weeks.
"The pilots heard a thud and then one of the engines stopped," he said.
"Then they heard a second thud and the second engine stopped. The helicopter was flying over a residential area and the pilots were able to fly over and head towards the forest to make an emergency landing."
Thanks to the "professionalism" of the pilots the situation is not worse than it is, he said.
"The people on board were very lucky," Miller's chief aide Marek Wagner acknowledged.
Miller's spokesman said the leader had been dragged out of the helicopter by one of his bodyguards."
The Scotsman reports that Mr Miller has been speaking to Britain's PM Blair and quotes the injured Pole as saying:
“The Polish position is stiff and I will go to Brussels even stiffer,” Mr Miller told Polish television today, pointing to a chest brace that he is wearing.
The article concludes with the following: In a last-minute diplomatic effort, Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski is set to meet German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in Berlin on Thursday. This will prove an interesting outcome to follow.
Reuters reports some of the unusual medical treatments being employed to insure eurosceptics best hope of scuppering the Constitution will be able to attend the weekend's meeting.
Fox news reports the exclusion of France, Germany and Canada from bidding for Iraq reconstruction contracts with emphasis on the Canadian aspect as can be read from here. German State broadcaster Deutsche Welle in its coverage of the decision, highlights the fact that Russia is also included in the exclusion, their report can be read from this link.
A Common EU Foreign Policy could never have been reached over Iraq and a majority vote would have destroyed the EU. This latest announcement highlights the blindness of those European Countries' Leaders who will assemble this weekend to discuss both a Common Foreign and Defence Policy as if the divisions over Iraq never existed....let alone continue to this very day.
US Executive Life Rejection set to distract Chirac as EU Crunch Approaches
Pinault's attempt to reach a settlement over the Executive Life scandal has, for the moment, been rejected by the US Authorities. Criminal indictments now look set to be served. Read the latest reports here, here regarding the already deeply unpopular Prime Minister Raffarin trying to take the heat off Chirac and here for a report from California on the political backlash in France.
Number 10 Press Briefing and Tory's Constitutional Stance!
The Downing Street report can be read from this Link, from which nothing new can be learnt, other than the fact that Blair is considering attending the pre-meeting with Chirac and Schroeder, see our post Pompous Franco/German Posturing below.
One major piece of good news is that it appears Michael Howard has now definitively stated that the Conservatives will not have the Constitution and will unravel it even if already in force should they come to power. The statement is contained in a piece in The Times TORY LEADER WOULD SCRAP DEAL ON EU CONSTITUTION by Rosemary Bennett, Deputy Political Editor.
The body of the article unfortunately proves that the commitment is not quite as firm as the headline implies:
"Mr Howard said that even if they succeeded, legislation ratifying the EU constitution was unlikely to get through Parliament by the time of the election, expected in 2005, giving him a free hand to renegotiate if he wins power. Even if passed here, other countries that plan to hold referendums were unlikely to have fully ratified the deal, giving scope to
unpick it."
and later this CLARIFICATION: "Asked specifically whether he would try to renegotiate the deal if the UK
had already ratified the constitution but other members were still in the process, he said: 'Yes'. "
This is of course not entirely satisfactory, because if the Tories did gain power and a compromise had then been cobbled together which all other countries had accepted and ratified, there is no commitment on the part of the Tories to go back on anything that has then been agreed. Clarification is needed on the Conservative attitude to all the other Treaty areas that Britain should no longer accept, such as the Common Fisheries Policy which his predecessors had committed to re-negotiate and the whole Nice Treaty which William Hague as leader had declared unacceptable.
History proves the Conservatives are the party to be trusted the least over Europe, albeit they now appear the last best chance we have! This statement is progress, and for that we should be grateful.
A week ago a report from Price Waterhouse Coopers, following a survey of European Businessmen stated :-
Only 36 per cent of European senior executives say the E.U. economy is currently growing, and a like number is optimistic about its prospects for the next 12 months, according to the PricewaterhouseCoopers Management Barometer.
However, despite the executives' gloomy outlook for Europe, 66 per cent said that the world economy is now growing, up from 39 per cent the previous quarter, and the same percentage is optimistic about the global economy for the next 12 months
In third quarter interviewing, senior executives in Europe said:
- Average estimated revenue growth for their company was 4.1 per cent for the next 12 months, down from 4.6 per cent in the previous quarter.
- Plans for major new capital investments remain unchanged.
- The workforce at their company will continue to contract.
In the US, 73 per cent of senior executives said they are upbeat about prospects for their own economy in the next 12 months, while only 46 per cent are optimistic about the world economy's prospects. (www.barometersurveys.com )
Since that report was issued the Euro has hit new record highs against the US Dollar on a daily basis. Meantime all the evidence we can find indicates the very pillars of the EU, notably led by the Growth and Stability Pact, are literally crumbling before our eyes.
Not all market players are blind to reality apparently, as alongside the climb in value of the Euro (and against much reported Central Bank resistance also the Yen) Gold too continues its steady rise. When will the broader markets discern that the euro-emperor has no clothes?
This is the slant put out by the EU. Unusually the link to the actual survey results is not simultaneously available. It will be posted here on Ironies as soon as possible.
Meantime the Commission's version must suffice : . Initial results will not now appear until next week....Is the news of public disillusion so bad that it alone might derail any agreement on the constitution?.
With opinion in Britain at only 28 per cent believing in the whole EU mess, even Blair must be beginning to realise his apparent determination to gain the EU Presidency at any price, might instead cost him everything!
A speech by Irish EU Commissioner David Byrne gives some further clues, he said:
"Let me look at the EU-15 figures.
On average, less than half regard membership as a good thing. A similar number see benefits from membership. Only 9 out of every 20 citizens trust the European Commission. With support for enlargement being at a similarly low level.
Not a pretty picture."
and somewhat later gave this quote:
"It is difficult to rationalise these findings. But it is nevertheless quite clear that positive sentiment towards the EU has fallen significantly this year and is at its lowest level in Italy and France since the eurobarometer series began."
Finnish FM Criticises Italian Presidency. Also Gisela Again
This report from yle news reports dissatisfaction from one of the ministers attending yesterday's meetings:
In Tuomioja's opinion, Italy has failed to bring to the negotiating table new proposals for consideration. This means that all open issues will have to be resolved at the EU summit this weekend
Meanwhile Camilla Cavendish in an Opinion piece in today's The Times warns against Eurosceptic optimism in the face of all the encouraging signs coming from Europe, she wisely warns:
Do not be misled by the mood music. A white flag is being discreetly unfurled even as the band plays the old nationalistic tunes. The machine is in motion and our Government will sign on the dotted line, as it has always intended, probably not this weekend but early in the new year.
The article concludes, however, with yet more reasons as to why it is so essential the strongest possible resistance must be maintained, with this telling paragraph:
There is still time for the Prime Minister to turn his ear away from the mandarins to his cohorts in the trenches. Gisela Stuart's conversion is less surprising than it seems. She is expressing doubts which she has privately harboured for a long time, that the constitution is entrenching an utterly undemocratic structure for Europe that reflects the political and economic attitudes of 50 years ago. If the woman who has hitherto been portrayed as the arch collaborator can admit her disillusion with the entire project,
then so should the Prime Minister. In the last-minute horse trading, it will be easy to forget that this constitution was supposed to be a way of improving the democratic accountability of EU institutions. The people ofEurope deserve leaders who will remember that.
The following, quoted in its entirety, is a very recent posting from a North American correspondent on an internet discussion forum:-
Quote
A Canadian website run by a Mr. Ralph Maddocks (www.quebecoislibre.org) has a long article re: the new (lopsided) Extradition Treaty between the US and the UK. This slyly conceived document was drafted by Home Office officials and their US counterparts, signed on behalf of the UK by Home Secretary David Blunkett, Mar. 31, '03, but not made public till late May '03. And holds serious >ramifications for British citizens they probably aren't aware of which explains why it was executed with such stealth.
The sellout of the British people by the terms of this Extradition outrage is covered by Ben Hayes of Statewatch, a group monitoring civil liberties in the EU. His comments are quoted in the article and at the end of this post.
Agreement of this Treaty became law by what Mr. Maddocks refers to as an "esoteric" process, known as an "Order of Council," (which he explains for people like me who didn't know) whereby the Queen calls a meeting of the Privy Council - usually a handful of Cabinet Ministers. There is no debate or discussion, (yeah! no point letting Her Majesty in on how deep the rats have gnawed into the foundation of Her Kingdom!) merely agreement on the matters before it.
Continuing as per the article in Mr. Maddock's words: " The decision to agree the new Treaty on extradition then becomes an "Order," which because it relates to existing UK legislation (l989 Extradition Act) is subject to the 1946 Statutory Instruments Act. The latter Act calls for the proposal to be "laid before" parliament, which means being simply listed on the daily order paper."
(Warning: if you don't want to become very angry do not read further.) "If MPs do not compel a vote to be taken on the floor of the house then the proposal automatically becomes law. It is extremely rare for MPs to force a >debate and vote on such a matter...
(Blunkett counted on it being a 'slam dunk' as they say, & he was right)
"...because it would mean disrupting the planned agenda of the government of the day and presumably the reigning dictator would not like that."
(golly no, what's the loss of civil liberties for British citizens compared to disrupting the AGENDA & upsetting Blair!)
Ben Hayes of 'Statewatch,' a group that monitors civil liberties in the EU, ommented "Under the new treaty, the allegations of the US government will be enough to secure the extradition of people from the UK. However, if the UK wants to extradite someone from the US, evidence to the standard of a 'reasonable' demonstration of guilt will still be required. No other EU countries would accept the US demand, either politically or constitutionally. Yet the UK not only agreed, but did so taking advantage of arcane legislative powers to see
the treaty signed and implemented without any parliamentary debate or scrutiny."
"The presence of such constructs as Guantanamo Bay...makes the decision to remove relevant UK safeguards all the more alarming."
Mr. Maddocks: "Mr. Hayes is right to be alarmed because, as in the US, the UK is changing the rules and continuing the step by step creation of a totalitarian state."
(in other words, the globalist in-house rats 'working' your side of the 'pond,' in collusion with the rats 'working' this side of the 'pond' and without a whimper or a whine in opposition, stole from the British people one of their most treasured civil liberties - the liberty to feel safe in one's own country.)
Read the entire article, OPEN GOVERNMENT IN THE NEW AGE, Musings By Maddocks, at the above site. (Linked here -ed.)
Unquote
EUobserver carries an item by Richard Laming writing personally and described as Director of 'Federal Union', the British federalist campaigning organisation, working in public affairs for commercial interests in London and Brussels. (Nothing whatever to do with the EU then!).
It is a riposte to the points made by Gisela Stuart in the Fabian pamphlet we covered yesterday and can be read here. In our view it is nonsense.
There is a certain wry amusement to be drawn from this latter piece which reports that its 'Back to the Drawing Board' on the defence accord, when remembering that following their last meeting in Naples this was the only area which was described as having been totally agreed.
The Daily Telegraph trailers a Eurobarometer Poll with bad news for the Euro-Federalist Fanatics. Titled 'Less than half show support for EU' and written by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in Brussels it reports a six per cent fall in public approval of the EU:
The latest Eurobarometer to be released this week found that just 48 per cent of EU citizens viewed membership as a "good thing", down from 54 per cent last spring.
Later the article reveals more of the claims of Praesidium Member Giselle Stuart linked from Ironies yesterday, we quote:
She said the secretive body chaired by Valery Giscard d'Estaing slipped through radical changes that had never been agreed, insisting on French documents to create confusion.
When the sole East European member dared to raise a dissenting voice he was told his vote "didn't count".
The use of French to conceal unpleasantness or worse is nothing new. Regular readers of the EU's daily press report 'Midday Express' cannot but fail to notice that economic bad news is almost invariably only available in French while all the main banal posturings and routine PR blurb comes out in English. What is truly pathetic is the reasoning processes of those responsible, who must believe this will go if not unnoticed, then at least unpublished.
The last thing the negotiations on the EU Constitutional Treaty would now seem to need for any agreement to be snatched from the jaws of breakdown, would seem to this writer to be the sort of superior and supercilious nonsense to be delivered by Chirac and Schroeder as reported in this item from this morning's Finacial Times headlined France and Germany unite over Brussels votes.
Take this statement "We would like to be able to tie everything up at the Brussels meeting. But we won't accept a bad agreement that risks making the EU ungovernable with 25 members," one French official said. "This means President Chirac may be ready to let negotiations continue beyond December's end of the Italian EU presidency."
The underlying assumption seems to be that somehow France and Germany have some sort of divine right to determine not merely the pace but the outcome of the IGC. The clear fact that these two countries have but two of the equally valid votes as the other twenty three attendees seems not even to have begun to enter their considerations.
Take the next paragraph for further proof of their remoteness from the negotiating realities:
France and Germany, which have traditionally steered EU policy, are concerned to avoid failure at the IGC. They are equally anxious to avoid giving the impression that they would "bulldozer" through an agreement on their terms at the expense of smaller nations, according to a senior French official.
I imagine few of the other nations are in danger of getting the impression that France and Germany might bulldozer through an agreement. Quite simply, for once, they totally lack any such power. This French official might reflect that it is Chirac's bulldozing of items through (such as the 13 year extension of the CAP) over the heads and sometimes even without consultation with the other Heads of Government that has so destroyed trust in the EU, now making new agreements so difficult to achieve. (See last weekends FAZ article 'Franco-German duo infernale').
On Nice, the article then continues:The poor handling of that summit remains a source of embarrassment to President Chirac and Paris is keen to demonstrate its full support for Germany in trying to make Spain and Poland compromise. The two leaders will also assess the chances of arranging a pre-summit "tri-lateral" meeting with British premier Tony Blair. This is under active consideration and a Friday session before the IGC begins has been pencilled in, according to those close to President Chirac.
In other words Chirac admits that he badly erred in getting Germany to accept only 29 weighted votes in the Nice Treaty, the same as for France and Britain. Schroeder's acceptance of such a compromise has always beggared belief and the German electorate's re-election of such an obvious bungler and inept negotiater makes them complicit in what he agreed and, in my view, therefore, bereft of any valid argument to now enforce a change. Spain and Poland have not only the signed and ratified Nice Treaty on their side they are also morally right and the continuing attempts to force through a change are contemptible.
Blair should leave Chirac and Schroeder to stew in their own juices!
Polish PM issues EU Challenge from Warsaw Hospital Bed
Al Jazeera from a Reuters report says there are signs of optimism for a deal by Saturday in Brussels -
But back in Warsaw, Prime Minister Leszek Miller said the increasingly tough tone of countries demanding reform of the EU's voting system could create a political crisis.
"We can feel something of a chill. The question is whether this is just acting or toughening their positions. Should the latter be the case, we might be heading for a confrontation and the Brussels meeting could end in a fiasco," Miller told public radio from his hospital bed.
Triplicated EU Defence Planning Highlights EU-Lunacy and Treachery
Indications that yet another Planning Centre was now being planned by the increasingly crazed EU Foreign Ministers that first appeared in the item below have now been confirmed in this report from EU Politix:-
The issue of a separate EU military planning headquarters is also yet to be resolved, despite the efforts of France, Germany and the UK to nail the issue on the head in Naples.
Their compromise would see a small operational planning cell in Brussels for EU missions conducted independently of the Atlantic alliance.
However, the majority of staff would be based at NATO’s military HQ, known as SHAPE, located in southern Belgium.
To allay suggestions that the planning cell is not in any way anti Nato (ie USA) the EU reluctantly agreed to base it within Nato. Now they realise they will be unable from there to keep things from the Americans, so they plan a THIRD planning cell safely among the EU Bureaucrats! Thus fuelling the suspicions they initially sought to deny!
Earlier in the same report further confirmation that these senior politicians seem to lose all grasp on reality once they convene under EU auspices:-
The four countries have protested that the clause undermines their neutrality and is impossible to accept in its current wording.
A compromise has been tabled which inserts the idea that if a member state is a victim of armed aggression “it may request that the other member states” give it aid and assistance, removing the controversial implication of automatic action.
It occurs to me that an aggressor planning to attack one of these smaller countries, given such wording of any defence pact, might well determine that a rapid and sudden attack could be accomplished in sufficient time to avoid the request for assistance being sent.
Surely the treaty implication of automatic action lies at the very root of a defence pact. They are, not for the first time, seeking wording to say something other than what the words mean to gain agreement to something to which some do not wish to agree. Like a bride saying 'I Do' when she doesn't.
Californian SFGate.com reveals EU Plan to duplicate Defence Planning Cell
Buried in this report on the EU Foreign Ministers meeting underway in Brussels today we find a reference to a duplicate EU Defence strategic planning unit to the only one so far described as being within Nato's SHAPE facility! EU constitution talks face tough hurdles as weekend deadline looms
The Europeans would also have a long-term, strategic planning unit at the EU head office in Brussels. It could plan for independent European military operations similar to the French-led EU peacekeeping operation in Congo this year.
Referendum04
2pm 8th December, 2003
Number 10 site crashes repeatedly due to Virtual March
"Shall the people decide about the EU Constitution?"
That was the question posed in the streets of 40 cities in 20 European countries on Saturday 6th December. During simultaneous events activists of the European Referendum Campaign (ERC) from Finland to Cyprus, from Lisbon to Bucharest found out that about 90% of the citizens want to have a say about the draft EU Constitution in fair referenda. The ERC, which is supported by more than 250 organisations from 30 European countries - representing more than 4.5 million members -, is demanding that the EU Constitution should be decided by referenda in all countries concerned.
In Britain, Referendum04 held a Virtual March on Downing Street. At 12 noon people began registering the demand for a referendum on the 10 Downing Street website, and thousands of hits to the site brought the system to a grinding halt on a number of occasions. The electronic march was the first of its kind and attracted support from the length and breadth of the land from people who wished to register their protest against the Government for its stance on denying the people a referendum on the subject of the European Constitution.
Neil Herron, Campaign Director said,
"the response has been fantastic and we have been deluged with thousands of e-mails from virtual marchers, who were still logging on to the site on Monday morning. Difficulties were experienced by many who could not register their protests as the Number 10 site crashed repeatedly.
Perhaps now Mr. Blair will realise that he will be forced to listen to the people who will not need a contrived 'big conversation' to make their feelings known. This is just the beginning of an enormous wave of public opinion, and people are queueing in the streets to sign our petitions as the country wakens to the implications of the proposed constitution."
Various reports are appearing today to the effect that Schroeder will adopt a tough line on the voting question in the Constitutional Treaty. That in The Guardian linked here seems to provide a broad account.
Germany are completely wrong on this matter and have no justification for the stance they are taking when it is recalled that it was Gerhard Schroeder himself who agreed to the voting arrangements agreed at Nice and subsequently ratified by all EU members, including the Germans. These procedures can be read from : Nice Treaty Voting Agreement etc..
Amazingly objection to the voting proposals drawn up by the Convention seem to be restricted to Spain and Poland who appear to be taking the biggest hit in reduced authority over what was agreed at Nice. In reality the Convention procedures represent a huge loss of decision making authority to all nation states and a commensurate increase for the Commission and a small powerful block of coutries at the EU's centre. This alone should be reason enough for all smaller countries to rally to the cause being led by Spain and Poland, apparently for once with British support!
If Schroeder does not like Nice, he should never have signed up for it!
Labour MP Convention Representative Lashes Constitution
Christina Speight's regular media reports brings news of Gisela Stuart's (Labour MP and member of the grandly titled 13 strong praesidium committee) attacks on the EU Convention and Constitution, first in yesterday's Sunday Times with a follow-up in today's Daily Mail. Christina's summary of the former article was as follows:-
"This is a chilling story of deceit, of chicanery and the naked exercise of unbridled power. The author is a Europhile but is disgusted at the way this was forced through.
It was not just Valery Giscard d'Estaing though. He was arrogant enough but he had his equal in the ex-Foreign Office mandarin Sir John Kerr. The Foreign Office betrays Britain yet again."
Some telling quotes from the articles:
'There was little time for informed discussion, and even less scope for changes. Large parts of the text passed through without detailed discussions.'
'In last-minute deals in the presidium, the six founding member states struck agreements on the draft constitution. It became a mixture of individual idiosyncrasies,
principled positions and political horsetrading.'
Democratic legitimacy involves parliaments and people. We need to ensure that people agree with the direction of their political leaders.
Should a country, or several countries, fail to endorse the constitution, the EU will not collapse ? the previous treaties remain and the accession of new countries still goes ahead. I repeat. The government does not have to accept it.
and finally from the Mail:
She accuses Labour of 'suffocating' proper debate about the implications of the treaty. Mrs Stuart warns that if Mr Blair does not bow to pressure to hold a referendum then he should at least agree to a free vote among MPs in Parliament before it is ratified.
Visit the Fabian Society site to order or learn more about the pamphlet by clicking here here or read the introduction from here.
A schedule for this weeks critical meetings can be read from this link to EU Observer.
The decision by the Scottish National Party to back a 'No' Vote and a referendum on the Constitution is reported in this item from The Herald. The article also highlighted the somewhat confused stance of the Conservatives under Howard's leadership on the EU. This statement in particular seeming to run counter to the petition for a referendum still being run by Conservative Central Office.
(Howard - ed.) ... pointed out, however, that talk of a referendum on the new EU constitution was premature. The EU had yet to reach agreement on the reform, which may not come this side of a UK election and could, in any case, be be vetoed by other member states.
There seemed remarkably little reaction to the publication of the Defence Protocol (reproduced below) in the mainstream media, but the Financial Times carries a report this morning on the neutral EU countries objecting to the inclusion of the mutual defence clause Neutral countries challenge EU defence plans.
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung has this Opinion piece in its weekend English online edition : 'Franco-German duo infernale' which can be read by clicking here.
The article begins with the following :Europe will not progress if Germany and France do not join forces. This is an old piece of wisdom, but we now have evidence that Europe not only fails to progress, but actually goes backward when Germany and France are (too much) in agreement. and proceeds to launch into a devestating (and in my view well-deserved but belated) critique of the present leadership of both France and Germany.
The article concludes : Before Paris and Berlin continue to play the duo infernale in Europe, they had better get their own house in order.
This is important and necessary, not least because the two countries are bound to continue to play a leading role within Europe in the foreseeable future. Their political leaders should realize what sort of damage flawed policies and insolent appearances can inflict on Europe. Europe is far too important to fall prey to a lack of principles.
While a flavour of the article can be obtained from the beginning and closing paragraphs posted above, for those with the time we recommend it all! Nothing of similar thoughtfulness has yet been found in our brief review of the British Sunday Press.
No sooner have we posted two posts beneath this regarding the disastrous EU Defence Agreement which will inevitably lead to the scrapping of our National Armed Services than this headline appears in The Independent on Sunday:
'Huge defence cuts to fund intelligence war on terror'
The article which can be read in full by clicking here begins as follows:-
Ministers are planning big cuts in military hardware in order to pour extra money into high technology intelligence operations. The plans are likely to provoke a bitter political war with service chiefs.
Those looking for the real cause of these cuts are invited to scroll down past the post on Jaques Chirac and read our earlier comments and the full Defence Protocol bound to end with Blair's Abandonment of British Defence
Speaking at a news conference here, Chirac replied simply "no," when asked Saturday if he personally had opposed the proposed agreement.....
Chirac said the government had a "constant position" -- that of "defending the financial interests of the state and the interests of French tax payers."
We will see if the proposed settlement of 585 million dollars ends up looking cheap or not!
The post beneath this quotes the full details of Blair's proposed handover of national defence to a supranational non-democratic body, where decisions will be made on a qualified majority vote after consultation with an appointed i.e. not democratically electedUnion Foreign Minister.
The proposals duplicate provisions already contained in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter and NATO commitments. Given these facts it is silent on the need for such a new Treaty Agreement .
Further AND obviously as the EU, with this Constitution, is now finally AND OPENLY showing its driving ambition to destroy all European Nation States, this proposal makes clear that those guiding the project have determined that destruction of all national armed forces must come first. These plans would seem to risk leaving the Continent dangerously undefended given the component nations' woeful defence underspending and idealistically pacifist tendencies .
The following are excerpts from the tabled amendments and the entire Protocol on what, in their usual attempt to deceive and confuse, the EU has chosen to call structured cooperation meaning Defence
The full document can be read in pdf format from this link: IGC 2003 - Defence
Quote
Article III-213
3. ...... 'The members of the Council of Ministers representing the Member States participating in structured cooperation shall act by a qualified majority after consultingthe Union Minister for Foreign Affairs.'....
Article I - 40 (7)
If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.
Commitments and cooperation in this area shall be consistent with commitments under NATO, which, for those States which are members of it, remains the foundation of their collective defence and the forum for its implementation.
Protocol
Protocol on structured cooperation implementing Articles I-40 and III-213 of the Constitution
THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES,
Having regard to Articles I-40(6) and III-213(6) of the Constitution,
RECALLING that the Union is pursuing a common foreign and security policy based on the
achievement of growing convergence of action by Member States.
RECALLING that the common security and defence policy is an integral part of the common
foreign and security policy; that it provides the Union with operational capacity drawing on assets civil and military; that the Union may use such assets on missions referred to in Article III-210 outside the Union for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter; that the performance of these tasks is to be undertaken using capabilities provided by the Member State in accordance with the principle of a single set of forces;
RECALLING that the common security and defence policy of the Union does not prejudice the
specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States;
RECALLING that the common security and defence policy of the Union respects the obligations under the North Atlantic Treaty of certain Member States, which see their common defence realised in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, which remains the foundation of the collective defence of its members, and is compatible with the common security and defence policy established within that framework;
CONVINCED that a more assertive Union role in security and defence matters will contribute to the vitality of a renewed Atlantic Alliance, in accordance with the Berlin Plus arrangements;
DETERMINED to ensure that the Union is capable of fully assuming its responsibilities within the international community;
RECOGNISING that the United Nations may seek the Union’s assistance for the urgent
implementation of missions under Chapter 6 or 7;
RECOGNISING that the strengthening of the security and defence policy will require efforts by Member States in the area of capabilities;
DETERMINED to include any Member State which wishes to participate in this process;
CONSCIOUS that embarking on a new stage in the development of the European security and defence policy involves a determined effort by the Member States concerned;
RECALLING the importance of the Minister for Foreign Affairs being fully involved in
proceedings within the context of structured cooperation;
HAVE AGREED UPON the following provisions, which shall be annexed to the Constitution:
Article 1
Those Member States which declare their willingness to go faster and further in developing the Union’s capability to undertake crisis management actions and operations, including the most demanding of these tasks, shall establish structured cooperation among themselves within the meaning of Article I-40(6) of the Constitution, to strengthen the capacity of the Union to play its role in the international arena.
Article 2
Member States participating in structured cooperation must undertake, on the date of entry into force of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, to:
(a) engage more intensively in the development of defence capacities, including through the development of their national contributions and participation, where appropriate, in multinational forces, in the main European equipment programmes, and in the activity of the European Military Capabilities Agency.
(b) have the capacity to provide by 2007 at the latest, either at national level or as an essential part of multinational force packages, targeted combat units for the missions planned, structured at a tactical level as combat formations, with support elements including transport and logistics, capable of carrying out the tasks referred in Article III-210, within a period of 5 to 30 days, in particular in response to requests from the United Nations, and which can be sustained for an initial period of 30 days be extended up to at least 120 days.
Article 3
To achieve the objectives laid down in Articles 1 and 2, Member States participating in structured cooperation shall undertake to:
(a) cooperate, after the entry into force of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, on objectives concerning the level of investment expenditure on defence equipment, and regularly review these objectives in the light of the security environment and of the Union's
international responsibilities;
(b) bring their defence apparatus into line with each other as far as possible, particularly by harmonising the statement of their military needs, by pooling and, where appropriate, specialising their defence means and capabilities, and by encouraging cooperation in the fields of training and logistics;
(c) take concrete measures to enhance the availability, interoperability, flexibility and deployability of their forces, in particular by identifying common objectives regarding the commitment of forces; this may include a review of national decision-making procedures;
(d) work together to ensure that the necessary measures are taken by the participating Member States to make good perceived shortfalls, in the framework of the Capability Development Mechanism, including through multinational approaches, without prejudice to undertakings in this regard within NATO;
(e) to take part, where appropriate, in the development of major joint or European equipment programmes in the framework of the European Defence Capabilities Agency.
Article 4
The European Defence Capabilities Agency shall contribute to the regular assessment of Member States' contributions with regard to capabilities, in particular, contributions made in accordance with the criteria to be established inter alia on the basis of Article 2, and shall report on them through the appropriate bodies at least once a year. The assessment may serve as a basis for the formulation of recommendations, in accordance with Article III-213 of the Constitution.
Aboard the 'gravy plane' to Brussels is the title of this article from Manchester Online that gives an idea of the benefits of the Brussels/Strabourg Trough.
The Financial Times in its edition of yesterday reported how sitting MEPs overturned proposal to reform their expenses system as can be read by clicking here.
Perhaps a pan-European campaign proposing that, NO sitting MEP, regardless of party, should be re-elected next June, would be one way of reminding these smug, useless sponges who it is who has to pay for these unjustifiable perks!
According to a report in this morning's Daily Telegraph, after several days of circumspection Colin Powell finally pronounced on the proposed EU Defence arrangements to be included in the EU Constitition - Powell's Concerns.
The German Foreign Minister seems not to have understood the depth of the dismay and disapproval, presumably because of the gentleness of its delivery. Canadian Broadcasting in this item titled - Germany's Fischer sees Washington in accord with EU defence plans reports that Fischer said:
"My impression is that our American and Canadian friends have understood that this is not directed against NATO but this is a contribution of Europe to the common security effort," Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer told reporters.
"We believe that now we have reached a level of understanding where all the concerns of our American friends are met," he said.
This clearly contradicts the full meaning of the statements made by the US Secretary of State as reported by the Telegraph. We quote:
The United States cannot accept independent EU structures that duplicate existing Nato capabilities, he said at Nato headquarters in Brussels.
American diplomats left no doubt yesterday that the soft-spoken Mr Powell was registering a thundering disapproval of the proposals for an EU operational planning cell in Brussels.
Now we must see if Blair for once sticks by his word and withdraws British approval for the proposed planning cell to be set up in competition with Nato. Should he not do so, then we must hope the main story of today's Telegraph, that he will be ejected over the top up fees matter proves to be speedily effected.
"We would very much like to see the constitution adopted, but let's be clear about this, we would rather do without a constitution than have a bad one," he told the deputies.
Given that we have yet to see any influential figure even half-heartedly endorse the Convention proposals, and the ever growing numbers of amendments indicates more general dissatisfaction, everything now on the table seems unworthy of signature.
The Constitution should be abandoned as having been a bridge too far and real issues such as what should be the EU position on Iraq (with which the EU will share a border if the Turkish accession talks are successful), the appalling unemployment levels, the failing economy and further adverse affect of the soaring Euro, the alternative to the butchered Growth and Stability pact, etc., etc., etc., should urgently start to be addressed!
Maybe two minutes silence for the death of democracy might also concentrate minds!
AS the Commonwealth Conference opened today in Nigeria, it was noticeable that while Zimbabwe received no mention in any of the opening speeches, it is clearly a matter at the forefront of the delegates' minds.
Any interested in the history of this difficult matter will find it worth while to read the speech, linked below, delivered by Lord Boyd, President, The Royal Commonwealth Society on 11th November 1965 (in Toronto, Canada) at the time of Rhodesia's 'Unilateral Declaration of Independence'. I retain a copy for the sentimental reason that it contains a flattering reference to one of my more illustrious forebears.
Colin Powell Rejects EU Defence Duplication with NATO
EU Business reports the above, which can be read from here:
he warned: "That said, the United States cannot accept independent EU structures that duplicate existing NATO capabilities."
Considering that the whole idea of a separate EU Defence planning facility originated in France, this will now no doubt be seen as a further point of friction. Coming on top of the 'Executive Life' matter now brewing up as an area affecting international relations as reported in this article from the Insurance Journal'Franco-U.S. Clash Heats Up over Executive Life', what restoration of relations might have occurred since the depths of the Iraq problems could be about to be reversed.
'The Polish foreign minister warned yesterday that Warsaw will block overall agreement on a new European constitution at a summit in Brussels next week as he attacked the patronising tone of western European governments towards their neighbours in the east.'
That is the opening paragraph in an article in today's Guardian written by Ian Traynor in Warsaw. The main, in our opinion fully justified Polish complaint, is regarding voting rights in the European Council. Poland voted to join the EU in a referendum with these voting rights fully agreed and signed within the Nice Treaty.
The new procedures proposed in the convention, as detailed studies linked and commented upon in this blog on 1st October show, will allow a small group to dominate decision making in the future if allowed to proceed. Read the study from this link to the pdf document: Decision Making and the Constitutional Treaty
Poland and Spain have thus become the standard bearers for those wishing to place a brake on the rush to authoritarianism within the expanded EU. Read the article from this link
The pink'un reports today that the US Claifornian courts are about to go public on the charges regarding the Executive Life scandal. The French Authorities are claiming (see Guardian report) that they are not 'afraid' of such court proceedings. Nevertheless Ironies is expecting them to be full of interest. Read the FT article from this link 'US set to publicise Executive Life charges'
Blair's Disingenuousness throws West's Defences into Confusion
According to this BBC News Report 'EU's defence plans baffle Nato' it seems that Britain's untrustworthy Prime Minister, has told so many different tales to so many different allies, partners and subordinates that nobody now knows what is the situation on Europe's defences as between the EU and Nato. We quote:-
At Nato HQ, confusion reigns. As defence ministers met on Monday, both the alliance's Secretary General, Lord George Robertson, and the US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, refused to say categorically that they were happy with the EU's latest plans.
Didn't Harold Wilson suddenly resign out of the blue and for reasons never fully explained??
Such is the argument put forward in a well reasoned article by Irwin Stelzer in an Opinion Column in today's edition of The Times. We cannot of course provide a link but can quote the last paragraph which provides the flavour:
By making it clear that America's staunchest European ally has signed up to France's "Yankee go home!" policy, Mr Blair has made it unnecessary for the US to wield the dagger to kill a once-useful alliance. He has done it for America. And many with influence in the Bush Administration are discreetly applauding.
Senator John McCain warned of just such an outcome some time ago which we recall reporting upon on the blog or elsewhere. The implied question underlying this theory is was this therefore deliberate? Is Tony Blair really dancing to a US inspired tune?
EU Politix reports that the EU's MEPs are set to vigorously protest attempts to amend the proposed powers the convention granted to the European Parliament over budgetary matters. Read it by clicking here
A report in today's Daily Telegraph describes how a French Minister directed half a million pounds of state funds to his now defunct party and described the matter as only doing what "dozens of prime ministers and a certain number of presidents" had done before him."
The article titled 'Everyone used secret cash, why shouldn't I? makes startling reading, especially when bearing in mind the influence the French political system has had on the framers of the new European Constitution.
M Donnedieu de Vabres (a co-defendant aged 49, currently spokesman for the Union for a Popular Movement of President Jacques Chirac) stood down as European affairs minister in the government of Jean-Pierre Raffarin, the prime minister, when he came under investigation in June 2002. He served as EU representative in Macedonia in 2001.
Daimler Chrysler - Another High-Profile TransAtlantic Spat
Channel News Asia reports on the opening of the case brought by US Billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian against Daimler Chrysler, alleging that the merger of the companies named was in fact a takeover. He alleges that in a takeover a premium over the price appropriate in a merger is normal - as the largest shareholder in Chrysler, he believes he suffered heavy losses and is suing for 1.2 Billion Dollars.
Much of the case will hinge upon an interview Chrysler Chief Juergen Schrempp gave to the Financial Times in October 2000. A recording of this interview was ordered to be handed over by the newspaper by a London court as can be read in this report from the The Detroit Free Press
A Forbes report on the case last June, indicated that Kerkorian is seeking nothing less than a demerger of the two companies and states:
If reports that the shareholders have documents showing Daimler-Benz was calling the merger a takeover are true, then officials at the then-German-owned company misjudged American corporate culture, says Tynan. "Put it down to their arrogance or whatever, they didn't see this coming back and biting them the way this has."
The breakdown also opens the way for grand jury indictments against the French state, MAAF and Credit Lyonnais - which could lose its license to operate in the United States - as well as other former bank officials
The French Nouvel Observateur on newstands tomorrow will publish a fax purporting to contain details of an attempt to bribe a witness in the case. The original article can be read by clicking this link here, or for a rather strangled translation here.
EU Business in an item titled Bundesbank warns of tensions between ECB, politicians on stability pact reports that Juergen Stark, warned on Tuesday that the row over the European Stability and Growth Pact was an "institutional crisis" that could lead to increased tensions between politicians and the European Central Bank. He continued:
"Further damaging the pact would expose the policy regime of monetary union to a very severe endurance test with tensions between the member states," Stark said in speech prepared for delivery in London, but made available by the Bundesbank in Frankfurt.
"Furthermore, the open budgetary flank increases the likelihood of tensions between politicians and the central bank."
Meantime the Euro steamed to new record heights against the US Dollars, on market fears the latter might be further weakened by the excessive US deficit. Who says markets run on logic. The damage being done to the economies of those countries within the Euro by recent currency appreciation, on top of the abandonment of any attempt at fiscal discipline by the two largest economies in the group can eventually only lead to the Euro's and Europe's economic decline!
The Scotsman reports US Secretary of State Colin Powell as taking over the lead in US opposition to the EU Defence force as indicated would be the case in the Rumsfeld press conference yesterday quoted below. In the article headed Powell warns on EU Defence Plan:
The United States is interested in hearing the EU’s ideas, Powell said after addressing a 55-nation European security conference in Maastricht, Netherlands.
“But the one thing that we feel strongly about is that we should do nothing which would in any way put at risk the established structure in NATO or how we do planning within NATO,” Powell said.
Mr. Secretary, do you think that if the Europeans set up their own planning cell and a military staff away from NATO is that duplicative or not?
Rumsfeld: I think I'm going to let the Ministers and the Foreign Ministers and Prime Ministers sort through that and characterize. First of all, that's a hypothetical question. We don't know what's going to evolve. And I've kind of set out my views here earlier and I don't know that I can add to it usefully. The discussions are going on. That's a good thing. And we've indicated our views I think fairly clearly, notwithstanding the fact that in some reports they've been imperfectly conveyed.
Okay, why don't we take one last question. The lady way in the back.
Q: This is rare that you're quite reluctant to give an answer because normally when we do ask you very direct questions you're very quick to give very direct and entertaining answers.
Rumsfeld: You're egging me on.
Q: No. (Laughter.)
Rumsfeld: Yes you are. You’re trying to get me in trouble. (Laughter.)
Q: No, no. However --
Rumsfeld: I know your organization. (Laughter.)
Q: However, --
Rumsfeld: I'm plucky but I'm not stupid. (Laughter.)
Q: I never said you were. However, can I go back to the EU and defense headquarters? This debate is nothing new for you. You were personally involved in the Berlin-Plus negotiations that took a long time.
Can I ask you a very direct question? Regardless of what has come out or not come out of NATO's meeting of the EU Foreign Ministers, does the EU need an independent operational planning cell?
Rumsfeld: Like I said, the other was the last question. (Laughter.) We're out of here. Thank you.
An article by Luc Debieuvre:' Will US allow Europe to become an adult?' appeared in the Gulf News last Saturday and can be read in full from this link:
"Why build Airbus when you can use a Boeing" which we quote as it seems to best summarise the author's (described as a French political analyst and an economics expert) argument.
The writer poses this false question: "Some European countries who are not prepared to assume their own destiny and pay the price for it may prefer the sole American umbrella, but why should other countries be prevented to team-up?"
If some countries wished to combine their armed forces and operate them as a single unit within Nato, I feel certain none could have the least objection. Indeed there are already some combined forces already operating with members drawn from more than one nation.
The present French plan is quite clearly to first duplicate and later act as a counterweight to Nato as can be easily divined by closely reading the entire article. Blair by going along with the Franco/German proposals is betraying his Non-EU Nato allies, particularly the USA , Canada. and Norway and others also within the EU. It is as clear as can be that this is a huge British Defence Policy volte-face! There should be an emergency parliamentary debate on the matter without any further delay! How can the nation's whole post-war defence strategies, assumptions and most basic alliances be cast aside without so much as a parliamentary question?
Recent press reports indicate that Rumsfeld has been told to keep a low profile on the subject, to me further highlighting the deep gravity of the situation.
The Scotsman reports one British minister at least, might have twigged one danger from the EU Constitution. Alistair Darling, often in the past having the air of somebody who might have a clue how the world really works unlike most of his cabinet colleagues, is reported to have said today in Parliament:
“We’ve made it clear that we will not agree to any proposal that is inconsistent with the United Kingdom’s energy interests.”
The CDU (Germany's main conservative opposition party) European Affairs Spokesman Peter Hintze is repotted to have told journalists in Leipzig today that his party would refuse to ratify the proposed EU constitution IF the document did not contain the double-majority voting system, proposed by the VGdE Convention, for future Qualified Majority Voting AND IF it failed to guarantee the independence of the European Central Bank (ECB).
Britain, Poland and Spain were proposing in Naples last weekend that the Nice voting rules should continue to apply AS AGREED until 2009.
While Germany is not planning a referendum on the EU Constitution (such not being allowed under their own constitution apparently) Chancellor Schroeder must have the support of the main opposition party to get the necessary majority to force the legislation through both parliamentary chambers.
The archetypical EU idiocy of rowing over a future EU defence force/ planning structure and future Foreign Minister's duties, while the organisation fails to address the most pressing foreign policy issue of the moment has finally dawned upon the Italian EU Presidency. According to MSNBC/Reuters:
''The European Union must take a position on Iraq. The policy it has followed so far of 'no money, no soldiers' is anachronistic today,'' Defence Minister Antonio Martino told Corriere della Sera daily in an interview.
The final paragraph of an item from The Times this morning is as follows:
One diplomat said that Britain had not succeeded in getting its way on defence: "Some of us believe Britain has already crossed all its 'red lines' by allowing the EU to have its own planning cell and a mutual defence clause. This is what France always wanted. This is the steady rise of the EU and the slow decline of Nato."
Earlier in the report we are informed that Britain's defence minister (who should long since have resigned over Dr Kelly's death) Geoff Hoon was hiding from the press but will meet with his US oppo Donald Rumsfeld this morning. Lack of any comment from yesterdays meetings is apparently due to nobody admitting they know what has actually been agreed, or as 'The Thunderer' (now available in tabloid format) quotes it:
There was widespread confusion about the exact status of the plans. "There is still a mystery about documents and what has been agreed and what hasn't," Lord Robertson said.
One Nato diplomat said:"We're still trying to work out what is happening." Another diplomat said: "It's a mess."
A question I would put to Hoon if I were in Rumsfeld's shoes would be along the lines of "As the French, Germans, Belgians and Luxembourgers made it perfectly clear when proposing the combined EU defence force command post and planning facility that it was to act as a counterweight to US interests, and considering counterweights only act in opposition why should the USA believe anything the EU now states on the matter.
The quote below is taken from this link Christian Science Monitor 21st February 2003:
At the root of Chirac's moves on the international stage in recent weeks is his vision of a strong, united Europe, with France at its head, acting as a counterweight to the US in world affairs. "Any community with only one dominant power is always a dangerous one and provokes reactions," he told Time magazine in an interview this week. "That's why I favor a multipolar world in which Europe obviously has its place."
Blair has chosen to gamble Britain's tried and tested, proven effective, defence arrangements in order to side with Chirac in a vainglorious and pointless French confrontation of the USA.
It is not as if there is any grand philosophical difference at issue....merely French pique that dates back certainly to De Gaulle if not before.
A report from Channel News Asia reports that the deadline for a settlement of the Executive Life matter was not reached at the midnight deadline.
This matter involving close associates of President Jaques Chirac and the illegal actions of the French Bank Credit Lyonnais while it was under the control of the French State will now presumably proceed through the Californian court process. A figure of just under six hundred million dollars had been previously agreed by the French state as a settlement but no agreement was attained as to further immunities.
Much of interest regarding how the government of one, if not the main. leading EU governments operates will almost certainly emerge. This blog will ensure details are precisely recounted as they are revealed.
As blogged here yesterday evening, Straw untruthfully claimed as reported in The Scotsman, that EU defence operations had been mounted several times recently. Tonight in the Foreign Office transcript of a BBC interview (linked from the following post) he says the following:
Take the six sets of military operations in which the United Kingdom has been involved: Kosovo was a NATO operation; Afghanistan a UN coalition willing NATO operation; Iraq famously was neither NATO nor EU but the US and the United Kingdom acting with a coalition of the willing; Sierra Leone was the United Kingdom alone; Macedonia is under what's called Berlin Plus, a European Union operation acting with NATO assets, an important consequence of St Malo; and in Bunia (which is in the Democratic Republic of the Congo) we are participating in a free standing EU autonomous operation because NATO does want to. So what we're trying to do is just to make all these things work better.
So rather than their being several EU deployments that Straw talked of last night, he now states there was only ONE.
Furthermore, far from being the orderly process suggested by Straw, the Congo operation became a matter for the EU as a straightforward PR exercise as stated by us at the time. It later became a fiasco as anybody following all the links below can quickly determine.
The mission to the Congo was commented upon in this blog on 4th and 13th June of this year as can be read by clicking on the titles: Backdoor Euroisation and The EU Fails Again, or by using the archive files.
The latter post was also placed on the Financial Times Discussion Forum on the same date with the following additional comments:-
The case has been made here earlier today, for stronger more autocratic leadership being what the EU needs. While I do not necessarily agree with that point, it is becoming increasingly clear that the EU totally lacks leaders of sufficient stature or ability to take on the role they have carved out for themselves through deceit and trickery.
This may seem a deviation from the topic but it is not, as it highlights the Leadership Deficit (which we Europeans can do nothing about due to the Democratic Deficit).
Playing a world role requires some sense of responsibility!
Running a world currency requires some consistency and fortitude!
Running a country in the absence of these attributes results in loss of office. Running the EU in the same way gives greater tax free rewards!
For the EU, bigger and greater and more disastrous failures can be all that lie ahead if reforms and accountability continue to be shirked!
Jack Straw epitomises the calibre of leader so castigated last summer. His performance over the past week as detailed here would have earnt his dismissal in any organisation requiring executive accountability. Instead he is probably now lining himself up as second EU Foreign Minister, the first according to the German Media, now certain to be Joshka Fischer...thus goes the EU!
Links from the original posts to press reports on the French/UN/EU deployment can be found here AND here.
This proposal has been difficult to pin down. We have found this explanation on a report from EurActiv summarising a study from The Federal Trust:-
The 'Escalator Clause'
The Convention's draft treaty also contains the so-called 'Escalator Clause' which allows member states to move policy areas, by a unanimous vote, from unanimity to the qualified majority procedure, without having to convene an IGC. The operation of the proposed new system could only be invoked by a unanimous vote of the European Council, thus ensuring that national vetoes remain effective in this area. The rationale of this proposal is that experience of an enlarged European Union may demonstrate to member states that desirable decision-making in certain policy areas is becoming impossible through the need for unanimity. The 'escalator' system would make it easier to solve any such problems without recourse to the cumbersome procedure of an IGC.
This is clearly an attempt to chip away at any areas requiring unanimity in the Constitution on a case by case basis. Quite why the devious minds at work behind the giant conspiracy the EU has become, consider a nation state will voluntarily abandon its veto in the European Council when it would refuse to do so in an IGC is hard to quickly understand.
Nevertheless one situation that does come to mind is when a nation state has been suspended under the provisions first agreed in the Nice Treaty. They then lose their vote. The escalator clause would thus allow the suspension of an awkward member say the UK, on some spurious grounds such as supporting the USA in enforcing UN sanctions in the Iraqi no fly zone as once they did...... and while the suspension was in force - using the escalator clause to make taxation, defence and foreign policy no longer subject to unanimity but to the Qualified Voting Majority procedures.
Alternatively financial or other bullying pressure could be applied on a regular basis against smaller, poorer nations thus forced to abandon strategically important matters, perhaps of chief national interest only to themselves.
The 'Escalator Clause' looks like becoming yet another tool of oppression in the new tyrannical EU conglomerstate. On first reading of this clause it was in the French version "PASSERELLE" and we translated it in the sense of 'Gangway' or the internet usage 'Gateway'. ESCALATOR is far more apt, once your are on....there is indeed no getting off!
An early area of pressure was the Airbus project. Today Quantas announced a large batch of airbus orders (no doubt to be largely paid for by EU taxpayers). The head of Boeing is now reported to have fallen upon his sword!
The New York Times and Washington Post both report Bush is about to capitulate over the WTO ruled 'illegal' steel tarriffs.
The Executive Life scandal deadline (see earlier posts) is supposed to finally expire at midnight tonight California time.
US/German relations could be further damaged by today's opening of the Daimler Chrysler trial; see this link to Deutsche Welle
AND all this before Donald Rumsfeld has emerged from the Nato meeting.
No wonder Gold and commodity prices seem nearly all on the climb!
We recommend this item from today's Daily Telegraph that can be read from this LINK.
A sample of the article titled 'This constitution will propel Europe on to 'history's exit ramp':-
There is no sign that the EU is shifting away from its pro-regulation mindset towards more liberalised labour markets - indeed, such markets are regarded as a nasty "Anglo-Saxon" anathema.
Highlights for this observer - some economic recovery is under way - ECOFIN conclusion on G & S pact carries serious dangers - necessity for structural reforms - price stability should be an EU objective in the Constitution - Euro as a foreign reserve currency up from 16.4% to 18.7%.
Following the virtual death blow, delivered by France and Germany, to both the pact and probably eventually the Euro Trichet stated on behalf of the ECB:-
"The public can rest assured the Governing Council remains committed to price stability".
With the two largest Euro participating nations showing no regard for prior commitments let alone signed treaties it is impossible to divine just how the Governing Council now plan to deliver on this pledge.
According to this report from the Italian press agency AGI (linked here) only the question of the qualified voting system remains in contention ahead of the Rome Heads of Government IGC meeting:-
(AGI) - Rome, Dec. 1 - The only hurdle to the passing of the European Constitution is the issue of the single vote system, but failing to reach an agreement "would be far worse for everyone, including Spain and Poland", the countries which oppose it mostly. That's what foreign affairs minister Franco Frattini said in an interview with the daily 'Corriere della Sera'. "By now - he said - this is the only pending issue: the voting system
The Guardian carries yet another warning to the Government that the draft EU Constitution represents a takeover by the EU of control of Britains offshore oil resources. This time the warning comes from the CBI.
As reported on this blog, this matter has been clearly signalled by Shell, BP, the Offshore Oil Operators Association, The Sun, and others. It seems that such warnings have all been ignored or the necessary assurances required by the industry have not been forthcoming. Blair having sold out Britain's defences now seems set to give away our oil and gas, what other conclusion is to be drawn from the linked article? We quote:
The CBI last night warned the government that the draft European Union constitution could threaten British control of its North Sea oil and gas, and pave the way for a single European financial services regulator.
The main employers' body said the draft debated by EU foreign ministers in Naples at the weekend, threatened "fundamental and damaging interventions" on tax, employment and economic policy.
The nation is being sold out, and it is being SOLD OUT NOW. The final meeting at which Blair will handle all these negotiations across a huge range of complex matters is only two weeks away. Now is the time for a parliamentary protest on a matter of grave importance, the present batch of Labour MPs will have much to answer for if this is allowed to continue unquestioned!
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!.
