Wednesday, 17 January 2007
Letters to the Editor
All roads lead to the Treaty of Rome
Having spent my career either reporting on, or working in
the EU, I have been dismayed at the steady stream of hostile and ill-informed letters that
have appeared in your columns. I was therefore delighted to read Martin
Toomey's letter calling for a more positive approach to Europe that appeared in your
edition of January 3. To judge by the reaction he has stirred up a hornets' nest among
your readers.
Mary Lees asks your readers whether they feel more allegiance to the
Union or the EU flag. As a British citizen and convinced European I identify with this
country and its national symbols such as the flag, but I also feel myself European. Unlike
Mary Lees I see no conflict. I have dozens of friends from other European countries who
identify with their own country and take pride in its history and achievements. But they
also see their country as part of a wider European community of nations which can provide
new opportunities for trade and co-operation and free movement across national borders, as
well as making it possible to achieve more at the international level than our countries
could achieve individually. None of them believe that their national sense of identity has
been superseded or replaced by a supranational loyalty.
All your correspondents and, I suspect, many of your readers have been taken in by the
great myth of the European superstate bent on extinguishing our existence as an
independent, self-governing nation, to use your words. Indeed you give credence to this
myth in the way you formulate the question to readers. It is true that the member states,
in signing the various treaties, have conferred real executive, legislative and judicial
powers on the EU. However, these powers are essentially limited to trade matters, the
economy, social policy and environmental protection – in other areas, particularly
foreign and home affairs, the EU proceeds on the basis of intergovernmental co-operation.
Even in those areas where the EU does exercise legislative powers the main decision-making
body is the Council of Ministers, i.e. the democratically elected national governments
acting collectively, rather than the 'bureaucratic' Commission (which is incidentally
appointed by the same national governments and accountable to the democratically elected
European Parliament). Neither in international law nor in its decision-making procedures
can the EU be described as a state: anyone who has ever worked in the EU will know that no
important decisions are ever taken without a lengthy process of intergovernmental
negotiation in which the member states play a dominant role.
It is worth pointing out that this institutional system was introduced by the 1957 Treaty
of Rome setting up the European Economic Community (EEC) or Common Market as it was then
called, the treaty which the British people ratified by referendum in 1975. Beryl Ferrers-Guy alleges that the British people were conned into
voting yes by their leaders, who claimed that the Common Market was just a trading
arrangement. No one who read the original Treaty of Rome could ever think that. It's all
there –
the Commission with its executive powers for example to ban state aids, the Council of
Ministers with its power to legislate on economic matters including the free movement of
goods, labour and capital, the parliamentary assembly (admittedly not yet elected) and the
Court of Justice whose rulings were binding on national courts, not to mention the famous
commitment to 'ever greater unity'. It is true that the volume of legislation and its
scope have greatly increased over the 50 years since the Treaty of Rome was signed, but
those who claim that the EU should have stuck to trade are rather like parents who send
their children to a C of E or Catholic school on account of the educational benefits and
then complain that the children have to attend religious services and follow divinity
lessons.
They should have read the prospectus.
David Samuel-Camps makes the absurd claim that the ban on state
aids in the Treaty of Amsterdam is responsible for the current wave of closures of post
offices. I will leave it to the self-confessed Tory Eurosceptic MP for East Worthing and
Shoreham, Tim Loughton, to rebut UKIP scaremongering about the
threat from Brussels to our post offices and hospitals. But there is a more fundamental
issue here. The Commission’s power to vet state aids does not come from the Treaty of
Amsterdam; it comes from the 1957 Treaty of Rome which laid down that all state aids to
industry or any other economic activity which could affect trade or distort competition
between member states were forbidden unless they could be shown to contribute to the
development of backward regions, industrial restructuring, technological progress etc.
Over the years the rules have been developed and refined partly through case law
(Commission decisions and rulings by the Court of Justice), partly through legislation
i.e. Council directives. It is true that they limit member states' freedom of action to
support economic activity of all kinds – that is the whole point. You cannot have a
common market or free trade area without rules to avoid distortions of competition and an
independent body to enforce them. If UKIP is really serious about abolishing the ban on
state aids, they would destroy the basis for free trade between the UK and its European
partners with incalculable consequences for the British economy.
continued in next column |
Some of your correspondents seem to be suffering from paranoid
delusions about the EU. Mr Samuel-Camps makes a series of
extraordinary claims: that the EU is responsible for the break-up of Yugoslavia and the
civil war which ensued; this must be news to the international tribunal in The Hague set
up to try Milosovic for crimes against humanity. Derek Hunnikin
blames the EU for destroying our ancient legal system. What is he referring to? The fact
that a significant amount of our economic legislation originates in Brussels and is
subject to interpretation by the European Court of Justice does not mean that our legal
system has ceased to exist. The criminal justice system including habeas corpus is barely
affected. Oh, and he believes that if only we stopped the haemorrhaging of British
tax-payers’ money to Brussels we could save our hospitals, lower council tax, support
our armed services and increase state pensions. Some people believe that pigs will fly.
Martin Vasey
Storrington
Wednesday, 10 January 2007
Letters to the Editor
European Kingdom
or United Union?
Your lead letter last week was accompanied by a splendid
photo of the EU flag.
In fairness will you now print one of the Union flag and ask your readers to which they
feel most allegiance?
Mary Lees
Littlehampton
Smug glow fails to shine light on facts
In replying to earlier correspondence about hospital and post office closures in West
Sussex Tim Loughton MP, while saying he was no fan of European
integration, emphasised that it was nonsense for UKIP “rant” to attribute such
ills to Brussels. He preferred to lay the blame “fairly and squarely at the door of
this Government.”
…. More post offices have closed in the last 10 years under Labour than ever before.
In West Sussex constituencies that has brought disproportionate inconvenience and hardship
for pensioners, disabled people and rural communities particularly. The remaining post
offices in Worthing typically have queues streaming out of their doors whilst other shops
in local parades reliant on business from post office customers have suffered from their
demise.
The Government’s response has been to transfer most post office services to banks or
the internet, such as pension payments or TV licences. Pensioners were compelled to give
up their pension books for unwanted entitlement cards which the Government recently
threatened to terminate already. The revenue of sub-post offices has subsequently been
squeezed so that the Government can say that they have become unviable and claim they need
to be rationalised or ‘reconfigured’ as they might put it when applying the same
trick to our hospitals.
This financial gerrymandering is completely to ignore the crucial role played by many post
offices in our communities and flies in the face of what our constituents tell us they
want. That is why I, and other Conservative MPs, have been leading the protests against
post office and hospital closures. More importantly we have been helping with petitions,
working with our sub postmasters and taking the fight to ministers who have the power to
reverse these unpopular, unwanted and unjust policies. That is what responsible and
constructive opposition is all about, actively working out in our communities. That is
what we believe we were elected to by our constituents on behalf of local people. We are
happy to leave the political games and scaremongering to UKIP. It may give them a smug
glow from the comfort of their armchairs but it certainly does not help our constituents
faced with the loss of post offices and hospital closures now.
Tim Loughton MP
East Worthing and Shoreham
Politicians complicit in power handover
I would like to comment on the letter from Mr Toomey (WSG March 3), who appears to be a supporter of the European
Union by extolling the virtues of Britain’s continued membership. He obviously has
not read the Treaty of Amsterdam, in particular Article 88, which demands that a national
government seeks permission from the Commission to grant state aid. Furthermore, directive
2002/39/EC requires permission before any state aid can be granted.
The Postal Services Directive 2002/39/EC reduced the part of the postal market which could
be reserved for the national monopoly.
In other words the British government is forbidden by the European Union to provide any
state aid for sub-Post Offices, which is why they are closing.
continued in next column |
I am afraid that he is
completely misguided if he thinks that the EU can provide ‘peace and prosperity for
all’. One only has to look at the Balkans, where the EU was partly or wholly
responsible for the war in that region, leading to thousands of people being massacred.
The EU ‘army’ had to eventually admit defeat and hand over the mess to NATO.
Prosperity in the EU is not guaranteed with inevitable demise of the euro, leading to a
financial and economic catastrophe in some of the eurozone member states. The European
Union 'aspires' to be a socialist state as ex-president Gorbachev observed to the
Commissioners when he asked: “Why are you setting up a communist state when we have
just got rid of one?”
The fact is that our politicians are complicit in giving away our country, our rights,
freedoms and privileges that are enshrined in the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights and
habeas corpus. The sooner we leave and become a self-governing, independent nation again
the better.
David Samuel-Camps
Political Assistant to Nigel Farage MP
Leader, UK Independence Party
Lyminster
Sovereignty has been slowly eroded
I cannot fathom whether Mr Toomey is
naïve or simply ignorant in his knowledge regarding our involvement with the EU.
Certainly his criticism of both your excellent paper and its readers is wholly unfounded,
in my opinion.
Firstly, the British people were conned at the outset. I vividly recall that when we were
asked to vote in the referendum, the EU was referred to by our leaders as a ‘trading
partnership’ hence the frequent reference to ‘the Common Market’. Had our
then politicians and leaders used a greater degree of honesty, I am pretty sure there
would have been a resounding 'no' vote to our entry. Slowly but surely, British
sovereignty is being eroded by the EU politicians, the legislation which rolls out of
Brussels at an alarming rate is appalling. The Human Rights Act being one of the worst
where we now have the farce of convicted criminals indulging in a plethora of law suits
against the judiciary, police and prison officers using the most spurious of reasons. I,
for one, am ashamed at the way we in Britain turned our back on our Commonwealth nations
who stood beside us and fought with us in two world wars without hesitation. Yes, of
course, in this troubled world in which we now live, we should stand together, nation with
nation, but why not show a greater degree of loyalty to the Commonwealth and, yes, the
USA? We should then be a force to reckon with. It seems to me that Germany, in particular,
has succeeded where Hitler failed, by achieving European domination without firing a shot
in anger. If ever push came to shove, I would have very little faith in either Italy or
France siding with us as our loyal partners as claimed by Mr Toomey. Perhaps he should
read a few history books. He would then understand my own and many others’ reticence
in having any faith in our EU partners.
Beryl Ferrers-Guy
Southwick
EU fails to satisfy its own criteria
Despite what your correspondent Martin
Toomey writes (WSG Jan 3), the fact is that our hospitals and postal services are
being compromised as a direct result of EU membership. There are plenty of books available
that provide conclusive evidence that EU membership has been, and will continue to be, an
unmitigated disaster for the people of the UK. The desire to run our own affairs, in
preference to the undemocratic and remote EU, is not a left or right wing issue but one of
'self determination', surely the aim of all free thinking peoples. This view is not
confined to the citizens of the UK - witness the rejection of the 'Constitution' by the
French and Dutch.
Switzerland and Norway co-operate with the EU, on matters of mutual benefit, without being
encumbered with the overwhelming bureaucratic EU regulations. Switzerland recently
completed a cost/benefit investigation into EU membership that confirmed they would be
foolish to join. Interestingly, Mexico enjoys a more favourable trading agreement with the
EU than does the UK!
A common assertion made by Europhiles is that the EU has been responsible for the
maintenance of peace for the past 50 years. This is not true. Until its collapse the only
threat to peace in Europe was from the Soviet Union. NATO, and the threat of a nuclear
holocaust, deterred the USSR from attacking the West. Furthermore, meddling by the EU in
the affairs of Yugoslavia, against the overwhelming advice of the rest of the
international community, was a major factor in igniting the conflict in that country.
The EU has proved to be of huge financial benefit to those politicians and many, but not
all, bureaucrats who support our continued EU membership. If the EU were to apply to join
itself, it would fall on the grounds that it was too corrupt.
For the privilege of the above and the destruction of our legal system, which had been
developed and refined over hundreds of years, we are haemorrhaging just under £100,000 on
the altar of EU membership every minute of the year. Surely, this money would be better
employed saving our hospitals/lowering council tax / supporting our armed services /
increasing state pensions and much more besides?
Derek Hunnikin
Hunston, Chichester |
Cheaper phone calls when
travelling: the EU acted decisively to cut the cost of using your mobile phone in another
country. Prices have begun to fall and further cuts will come in 2007.