This sort of thing reduced me nearly to spittle-flecked rage.

“countries that depart from democratic norms”

How can these shits even say things like this with a straight face? DEPART from democratic norms? You mean, elect governments that the people actually want, rather than supercilious over-entitled over-rewarded redundant unelected c***s like you, Herr Junker? In what way is that to DEPART from democratic norms?

When do we rise up and hang them all?

Reply

Oh – and I meant to add that I am delighted that the phrase ‘the traitor Heath‘ seems to be picked by many of your followers as it is one that I have been using for over 10 years as my blog will confirm. The man should be dug up, dismembered and his limbs scattered to the 4 corners of the kingdom (whilst it still exists!) and his festering head stuck on a pole outside Parliament as a warning to traitors everywhere.

No doubt some smartarse will now tell me he was cremated…

Reply

And even Tony Benn wrote in 1975:
In 1975 you will each have the responsibility of deciding by vote whether the United Kingdom should remain a member of the European Common Market: or whether we should withdraw completely, and remain an independent self-governing nation. That decision, once taken will almost certainly be irreversible.

In both the 1974 general elections I fully supported our manifesto commitment on the handling of the Common Market question. The present Government is now engaged in renegotiating the terms of entry along the lines set out in those Manifestos and is solemnly pledged, whatever the Outcome of those negotiations, to see to it that the final decision will be taken by the British people.

But we must recognise that the European Community has now set itself the objectives of developing a common foreign policy, a form of common nationality expressed through a common passport, a directly elected assembly and an economic and monetary union which, taken together, would in effect make the United Kingdom into one province of a Western European state.

Britain’s continuing membership of the Community would mean the end of Britain as a completely self-governing nation and the end of our democratically elected parliament as the supreme law-making body in the United Kingdom.

I am writing, not to argue a case, but to explain — as best I can — what effect British membership of the Common Market has had upon the constitutional relationship between a member of Parliament and his constituents. The Parliamentary democracy we have developed and established in Britain is based, not upon the sovereignty of Parliament, but upon the sovereignty of the People, who, by exercising their vote lend their sovereign powers to Members of Parliament, to use on their behalf, for the duration of a single Parliament only — Powers that must be returned intact to the electorate to whom they belong, to lend again to the Members of Parliament they elect in each subsequent general election. Five basic democratic rights derive from this relationship, and each of them is fundamentally altered by Britain’s membership of the European Community,

First: Parliamentary Democracy means that every man and woman over eighteen is entitled to vote to elect his or her Member of Parliament to serve in the House of Commons; and the consent of the House of Commons is necessary fore Parliament can pass any act laying down new laws or imposing new taxation on the people. British Membership of the Community subjects us all to laws and taxes which your Members of Parliament do not enact, such laws and taxes being enacted by Authorities you do not directly elect, and cannot dismiss through the ballot box.

[Alt-Text]

Second: Parliamentary Democracy means that Members of Parliament who derive their power directly from the British people, can change any law and any tax by majority vote, British Membership of the Community means that community laws and taxes cannot be changed or repealed by the British Parliament, but only by Community authorities not directly elected by the British People.

Third: Parliamentary Democracy means that British Courts and Judges must Uphold all laws passed by Parliament; and if Parliament changes any law the courts must enforce the new law because it has been passed by Parliament Which has been directly elected by the people. British Membership of the Community requires the British Courts to uphold and enforce community laws that have not been passed by Parliament, and that Parliament cannot change or amend, even when such laws conflict with laws passed by Parliament, since Community law over-rides British Law.

Fourth: Parliamentary Democracy means that all British governments, ministers and the civil servants under their control can only act within the laws of Britain and are accountable to Parliament for everything they do, and hence, through Parliament to the electors as a whole. British Membership of the Community imposes duties and constraints upon British governments not deriving from the British Parliament; and thus, in discharging those duties Ministers are not accountable to Parliament or to the British people who elect them.

Fifth: Parliamentary Democracy because it entrenches the rights of the people to elect and dismiss Members of Parliament, also secures the continuing accountability of Members of Parliament to the electorate, obliging Members of .Parliament to listen to the expression of the British people’s views at all times, between, as well as during, general elections, and thus offers a continuing possibility of peaceful change through Parliament to meet the people’s needs. British Membership of the Community by permanently transferring sovereign legislative and financial powers to Community authorities, who are not directly elected by the British people, also permanently insulates those authorities from direct control by the British electors who cannot dismiss them and whose views, therefore, need carry no weight with them and whose grievances they cannot be compelled to remedy.

In short, the power of the electors of Britain, through their direct representatives in Parliament to make laws, levy taxes, change laws which the courts must uphold, and control the conduct of public affairs has• been substantially ceded to the European Community whose Council of Ministers and Commission are neither collectively elected, nor collectively dismissed by the British people nor even by the peoples a all the Community countries put together.

These five rights have protected us in Britain from the worst abuse of power by government; safeguarded us against the excesses of bureaucracy; defended our . basic liberties; offered us the prospect of peaceful change; reduced the risk of civil strife; and bound us together by creating a national framework of consent for all the laws under which we were governed. We have promised a ballot box decision because all these rights are important, and none should be abandoned without the explicit consent of the people.

Reply

“Too many postal votes.” Probably sending them out pre-printed to save the nice man at the mosque putting all those crosses in the right boxes.

Reply

My kids and their spouses, the next generation, have so far never shown any real, direct interest in big politics before, so I was a bit amazed to find out that they were actually working out their timetables to make absolutely certain that they all got their votes counted. They’re angry. And they are all going to be voting ‘Remain’. For their future, so will I.

Reply

I’m late into this – but it’s important.

You’re quite right, and it’s not the first time the EU has tried to decide who runs European states. But in fact it’s well known, in Europe at least, that the aim of the EU is political integration. The euro-army nonsense, and their devotion to the already-failed single currency project are stepping stones that can only lead irreversibly in this direction. As with Ted Heath and the EEC and then Maastricht they are trying to make it harder and harder for member countries to get out of it.

What this means is that we’d give up a stable democracy (yes, with faults) which has developed slowly over centuries, but remains very flexible – so well that we’re spoilt enough to think of changing it for no reason. We’re in danger of giving all that up for an untested political experiment (with the lives of 400 million+).

Our votes would be diluted in strength, competing with those from 27 other states, electing MEPs who have less power than our MPs. Much of the power in fact lies with the unelected European Commission: look at *their* huge salaries and their collaboration with big business lobbyists. It’s perfectly clear how little they care for the UK, yet they want to run things for all of Europe, including decisions that are far better left to member countries. What chance have we (the ordinary people of Britain) that our interests would be looked after by them?

People who say they’ll vote remain simply haven’t thought this though. We must leave

Reply