What has changed that makes EU membership a burning issue? What has changed is that the 19 countries of the Eurozone are now seeking political union to escape their financial problems. Seven further EU countries have signed up to join the Euro but the British and Danish have opted out . The EU is rapidly becoming two blocks - the 26 and Britain and Denmark. Several Tory politicians were concerned that if Britain stays in the EU it will be isolated and dominated by a Eurozone bloc that would act like a single country which controls 90% of the votes in the EU with no vetoes available to the UK.
This was the original reason why a referendum on our membership of the EU had become urgent. It could be seen by all those involved that the UK would lose its voice in the EU and have very little say in EU policymaking. Somehow this original reason for a referendum has been lost.
Eurozone Union was in the opening paragraphs of Cameron's renegotiations: "There are today effectively two sorts of members of the European Union. There are Euro members and non-Euro members." but has since been carefully hidden.
The discussions about economics etc. are a deliberate diversion. This referendum is about decades and centuries in the future when the bribes and lies to get the vote of this generation have been forgotten. It is about ending UK self-government over the next 10-50 years. It will deprive future generations of self government forever. Many people want this to happen but do you?
Click on the links if there is anything you don't believe below.
Yes, the EU is about becoming a Union
As little as three years ago most people would have scoffed at anyone who said that the Eurozone would be headed for political union. Everyone believed that the Eurozone crisis and Greek crisis would destroy it. We were all wrong. The Greeks have preferred to stay in the Eurozone despite the most terrible cuts in government spending and against all expectation the Eurogroup, as the Eurozone now calls itself, will, by the end of the year, achieve "Stage 1 of Union".
Stage 1 of Eurogroup Union involved the creation of a banking union in which all the banks in the Eurogroup are controlled by the European Central Bank and the formation of a Eurogroup Finance Committee with a President, Jeroen Dijsselbloem.
All 19 Eurogroup Member States must submit their national budgets to the Eurogroup Finance Committee for approval. The Eurogroup meets before each EU Council meeting to discuss Eurogroup policy on financial matters. This means that on financial matters the EU Council now consists of the Eurogroup representative, who controls the majority of votes, and the others.
This is incredibly important: Stage 1 has happened, we are not speculating idly about something that might happen. Stage 1 of union is here, now and from 2016 onwards it puts the UK at a huge disadvantage.
This completion of Stage 1 of Eurogroup Union is a huge event and it has already happened. Can you imagine George Osborne, the Chancellor, going to Brussels to have his budget checked and approved by a Finance Committee? Can you imagine the Bank of England being superseded by the European Central Bank so that Barclays, RBS etc. answer to an EU Banking System? We should now ask ourselves: why hasn't the BBC or the Prime Minister mentioned that this is happening?
"Stage 2 of Eurogroup Union" involves full political union. It is scheduled to begin in 2017 and will be complete by 2025. Had Stage 1 not been so successful we might doubt Stage 2 but we can be under no illusions that the leaders of the Eurogroup are determined to forge ahead with political union. See Note 1 below for the views of the EU Leaders who see Eurozone political union to be increasingly urgent with every new Eurozone problem. Full political union means that the Eurogroup will speak with one voice on almost all matters and this will occur within 9 years.
The EU is progressing at two speeds: the Eurogroup and Denmark plus the UK. There are also seven countries waiting to join the Eurogroup. European leaders have been warning the UK for 20 years that a two speed EU would occur and it has. Although it is planned and in process, you may believe that Stage 2 will not happen, however, in a two speed Europe there will come a day when a large part of the EU becomes a political union.
Does this matter? When the UK had extensive vetoes the rise of the Eurogroup would not have been important but the EU Treaties were amended by the Lisbon Treaty so that the UK had lost almost all of its vetoes by 2014. The Eurogroup can simply Regulate and Direct as it wishes and there will be nothing that the UK and Denmark can do about it except join the Eurogroup or leave the EU. If you vote Remain in the coming referendum it will probably be taken as approval for joining the Eurogroup.
If the UK joins the Eurogroup a majority voting system will be used for almost all decisions and the UK will have but 8.5% of the votes numerically (although the way votes are counted can be complex and raise this percentage slightly). Remaining in the EU will mean the end of self-government in the UK.
It is of huge importance that you spread news about this. The EU is about to form a political union, that was why this referendum was called. Austria almost elected a far right president in May, like the UK electing a BNP government, except that the Austrian far right is pro-EU, imagining that the EU will swing far right in the future. The EU does not have our history of avoiding the far left and right. In a decade or two the EU could be ruled by parties that would never get power in the UK. At present the UK Parliament can call referendums on membership but once inside a full political union there will be no easy way out, it would need a majority in the EU Parliament for another Referendum to occur. If you do not spread the news by email, social media etc. all coverage of the real reason for the referendum will be suppressed.
Cameron's failed renegotiations were held in a desperate attempt to deal with Stage 1 of Eurozone Union and all of those pressing for a referendum were desperately concerned about Stage 2 of Eurozone Union and the inevitable loss of UK self government if we Remain in the EU. This loss of self government will affect the people of Britain forever, long after the promises and bribes of this Referendum are forgotten.
Read on for the views of the EU Leaders and why the reason for the referendum, the eventual loss of UK self-government, is being suppressed.
Why do Corporations, Governments and International Organisations Support the EU?
The answer to why Corporations support the EU lies in the Balance of Payments between the EU and the UK. The UK has an enormous Current Account Deficit with the EU:
Click here to see ONS original
The deficit is over £100bn a year. If you do not believe this click on the link under the graph, this is official UK government data.
The UK has a better environment than the rest of the EU for business so EU companies are investing in the UK. The EU companies are largely multinationals and they buy stock and plant and machinery from their EU sources to stock and equip their UK investments which leads to large amounts of imports from the EU. The profits that the companies make are sent back to the EU with little tax paid. Rents taken by EU investors go straight back to the EU. The net affect of all of this is a huge trade deficit with the EU:
UK Balance of Trade in Goods and Services
To be clear, the trade deficit is not caused by any failure of British exporters, it is the result excessive imports due to the flow of EU money into the UK. The deficits are not like other country's deficits, they are due to our relationship with the EU.
We should now ask ourselves: why hasn't the BBC or the Prime Minister mentioned that this is happening?
The reason that this is being kept quiet is that it benefits the corporations. You may have noticed that Siemens, Easyjet, BMW etc. have been very vocal in their support of the Remain campaign, the reason is simple, they can ship all their profits back home and use their normal, EU suppliers for plant, stock etc. without any charges. Best of all they can shunt the profits around so that they pay no corporation tax. Remaining in the EU is a huge benefit to Multinational Corporations. Sadly it is of much less benefit to you and me, the profits are taken out of the UK so do not expand the UK economy as they should. Furthermore, with free movement of labour and low unemployment in the UK, the EU investment in the UK sucks in EU workers rather than raising UK wages. We get overcrowding, poor services, struggling hospital and educational services, high rents and high house prices and the Eurozone gets the benefit.
2m EU Workers in the UK
In simple terms, EU Investment in the UK appears as if it is increasing the GDP of the UK but it is actually enriching other EU countries. This is what the Balance of Payments deficit means. When economists say that being a member of the EU will increase UK GDP what they are really saying is that the UK being a member of the EU is excellent for pan-European corporations and for the Eurozone.
When you hear BMW, Easyjet or Siemens declare that the UK must not leave the EU they are speaking about their own interests, not yours.
Why do Governments and International Organisations Support the EU?
Obviously all the Eurozone governments support the EU because they are totally committed to the project but why does the USA support the EU so fervently? The USA support the EU because they set up the EEC in the first place. This may be a surprise to many readers. Yes, the Common Market, the customs union, was a requirement of the Marshall Plan. If you did not sign up to the Common Market you did not get aid after the Second World War. This essential detail of EU history was omitted during the Cold War because it was feared that European voters would be sensitive to unification under US pressure.
The Western Allies conquered Western Europe in 1944-5 and instead of imposing an Allied government of occupation they imposed a system of cooperative government. They established the Committee of European Economic Cooperation (CEEC) to propose a plan for the future. The Committee was run by George Marshall and Ernest Bevin and the plan became the basis for the Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan was financed by the US Foreign Assistance Act 1948. This Act put CEEC policy firmly in charge of Europe (the CEEC later became the OECD) and contained the condition that countries that received aid must join the Common Market. The UK, to assert its independence, opted for loans that were only finally repaid this century. Eventually the Allies set up the World Bank, IMF, GATT (later to become the WTO). These organisations were all part of the post-war Allied management of the West.
This is why these organisations speak with one voice today, they are largely financed by the USA and created by the Western Allies. They are what David Miliband called the "International Order".
The USA financed the foundation of the EEC because it wanted a bulwark against the USSR and a tractable Europe. Any mention of US involvement was suppressed during the Cold War. The Cold War has ended but the USA is left with an organisation in Europe that it can control and use. An organisation that hugely enhances US power and reach.
The USA is largely financing the "Britain Stronger In Europe Campaign" through its Investment banks. The "Britain Stronger in Europe Campaign" was set up on the 16th June2015 by the "European Movement", an organisation that was
originally created by the Western Allies to create a European Union. The initial backers of "Stronger In" were US investment bank Goldman Sachs and US Investment bank JP Morgan . The next big backers were US Investment Banks Citigroup and Morgan Stanley. The USA has been working for 70 years on the EU project and does not want to see it weakened now.
Why do the BBC, Financial Times and Economist support the EU?
The list below shows attendance at a meeting on June 15th 2015 of an Organisation of Corporations and Governments that was originally set up by Josef Retinger, the Secretary General of the "European Movement", to foster the EEC and work towards the EU. Notice that the BBC is on the list.
The meetings are secret. The BBC, FT and Economist did not report on what went on in the meeting, they were there to take instructions for the future. The BBC, a public corporation, should never have attended a secret meeting of this sort.
It is essential to realise that the BBC, FT and Economist are not impartial in the EU debate, they are key players on the Remain side of the campaign.
What can you do? If you want to save your country for future generations you can click on the Twitter and Facebook buttons at the end of this article to spread the word to your friends and email the address of this article to everyone you know.
Note 1:
All the important players in Europe are moving towards political union and there will be a political union in the EU within 30 years whatever happens in the Eurogroup.
Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor said:
"we need a political union first and foremost" (BBC News).
Guardian
Francois Hollande, the French president said:
"Political union is the step that follows fiscal union, banking union,
and social union. It will provide a democratic framework for successful
integration." (Le Monde)
President Sergio Mattarella of Italy's inaugural speech Feb 2015:
"The EU is now once again a perspective of hope and
true political union to be relaunched without delay."
Mariano Rajoy Brey, Spanish prime minister:
"We need to fix these objectives - fiscal union, banking union,
political union...And we must set a time scale. We are giving a message
that we really want greater European integration. We can't say something
is this first, then something else, without saying where we're going,"
Rajoy said at a news conference with Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti. (Reuters report).
What the European Commission says:
José Manuel Durão Barroso, President of the European Commission said:
"This is why the Economic and Monetary Union raises the question of a
political union and the European democracy that must underpin it."...
.."A deep and genuine economic and monetary union, a political union, with a
coherent foreign and defence policy, means ultimately that the present
European Union must evolve." (State of the Union 2012 Address to the European Parliament on 12 September 2012).
The EU's Blueprint for a deep and genuine economic and monetary union (and political union) states that:
"This Blueprint for a Deep and Genuine EMU describes the necessary
elements and the steps towards a full banking, economic, fiscal and political union."
What the European Central Bank says:
1999 paper by the European Central Bank: Europe: Common Money - Political Union?
In this paper it says that:
"The monetary order established
by the Maastricht Treaty with the detailed statute of the European System
of Central Banks by itself represents an important building block for the
development of a European statehood."
The importance of the connection between monetary union and the
establishment of a single state was well understood at the new European
Central Bank in 1999:
"So what does the future hold? Anyone who believes in the role of a
single currency as a pace-setter in achieving political unity (Europe
will be created by means of a single currency or not at all (Jacques
Rueff 1950)) will regard the decisive step as has having already been
taken. This does not provide an answer as to how the "rest" of the
journey should be approached. "
How does the European Central Bank see the current Euro crisis evolving? Here is an
extract from an ECB approved presentation on the subject, Short Term Crisis Management and Long Term Vision, describing the 4 steps to a solution:
The first is a financial union, with a single framework for supervising and
resolving banks and for insuring customer deposits. This would build on
the single supervisory mechanism now under development and ideally lead
to a European version of the FDIC, financed by contributions from the
private sector.
The second building block is a fiscal union, with powers at the euro area level to prevent unsustainable fiscal policies and to limit national debt issuance. With
these powers in place, a path towards common debt issuance would also be
possible, but only at the end of the process.
The third building block is an economic union, which would help euro area members to remainfit and to adjust flexibly within monetary union. This could entail, for example, moving from soft coordination of structural reforms in MemberStates to an enforceable framework at the euro area level.
And the fourth building block is a political union, which aims at strengthening democratic participation. This final building block is equally important, as the
other measures cannot be effective unless they are legitimate. This
requires innovative thinking as regards the involvement of the European
Parliament and national parliaments in decision-making on euro area
issues.
Comments