In today's Express on Sunday, there is a copy of a letter sent to Conservative activist Anita Segar. Ms Segar had written to the Prime Minister in respect of a referendum on EU membership. The Prime Minister's political secretary, Laurence Mann, responded, and below is a copy of the letter. It would appear that the arrogance of a government, who are totally out of touch with the people they are supposed to be representing, has no bounds. Please note the reasons Mr Mann gives for staying in the EU, and why we pay approx £50,000,000 a day to belong to this organisation. It would appear that Mr Mann is struggling for words and fails to provide any evidence of any benefits to the UK. (See full articles
The Letter sent by David Cameron's Political Secretary and
PM will not have EU Referendum
Dear Ms Segar
I am writing on behalf of the Prime Minister to thank you for your letter of 12 July regarding our membership of the EU.
We understand the strength of feeling of some who would prefer us not to be in the EU at all and that, like you, would like an in/out referendum to take place. There are some perfectly respectable arguments in favour of holding such a referendum. But there are also many strong counter-arguments, such as the fact that we had a referendum on that issue in 1975, which produced a very clear result.
There is also one argument, in particular, against holding such a referendum that we find irrefutably powerful, namely that most people in our country want to say neither ‘yes’ to everything from the EU, nor ‘no’ to everything.
The EU is not a matter of everything or nothing. We have, in the past, done well in ensuring that Britain can participate in the collective good carried out by the EU, such as free markets, while keeping out of things that we believe would be bad for our country. For example, we are not part of the Schengen Zone but have kept control of our own border controls, just as, crucially, we have kept the pound.
And we should not lose sight of the EU’s very useful work, such as ensuring that all the nations of Europe are equipped to face the biggest challenges of the 21st Century: global competitiveness, global warming and global poverty. These are compelling arguments for why we believe Britain should be an active member.
Of course the EU has some serious failings too, and there are certainly areas where its powers should be reduced. But a simplistic in/out referendum – posing an artificial choice that does not do justice to the range of views in the country – would be highly unlikely to settle the question of Britain’s membership of the EU at all.
Rather, the government believes it much more effective to use the weight of our membership to negotiate and force positive change.
The Government has also introduced a European Union Bill, currently before Parliament, which will give Parliament and voters more say over important EU decisions. This new legislation will ensure that if, in the future, there is a change to EU Treaties that move a power or an area from the UK to the EU, the Government of the day will have to ask for the British people’s consent in a national referendum before it can be agreed. This ‘referendum lock’ ensures that politicians in Whitehall will never again be able to hand over more power to Brussels without asking the British people first.
The Bill also places on a statutory footing the principle that Parliament is sovereign and that EU law only takes effect in the UK by virtue of the will of our own Parliament, expressed through Acts of Parliament.
Of course, in its first year in office this Government has been highly active on many other EU issues. We have made a good start in bringing the hitherto inexorable rise of the EU budget under control, saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds. We have ensured that from 2013, Britain can no longer be liable from Eurozone bail-outs, another legacy from the Labour Government we have had to sort out.
And we are pushing forward measures that will be of benefit to Britain: making sure an EU-South Korea Free Trade Agreement was reached, which will mean big new opportunities for British businesses; and ensuring that the lifting of regulatory burdens on businesses, particularly small businesses, is firmly on the EU agenda. We have achieved a good deal in getting the countries of the EU to use their collective weight in the world effectively, such as on tough, targeted sanctions on Iran or action to help countries moving towards democracy in the southern Mediterranean.
The Prime Minister fully understands that our membership of the EU incites strong feels (sic) in many people. But I hope this goes some way to explaining why we believe that an in/out referendum would be highly unlikely properly to settle the question of Britain’s membership of the EU, and also how we are securing the best deal for British people through our active and positive membership, while ensuring that our national sovereignty is protected in the future. Please be reassured that the Prime Minister would never allow our country to slide into a federal Europe.
Yours sincerely
Laurence Mann
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would just like to challenge some of Mr Mann's remarks in his letter, and therefore challenge Mr Cameron on these statements, as Mr Mann is his representative.
1. "We understand the strength of feeling of some who would prefer us not to be in the EU at all and that, like you, would like an in/out referendum to take place. There are some perfectly respectable arguments in favour of holding such a referendum. But there are also many strong counter-arguments, such as the fact that we had a referendum on that issue in 1975, which produced a very clear result." The strong counter arguments are never put in the public arena, in fact the main British television news and some national newspapers carry very little, or no news at all about EU powers over Britain, or, in fact, any benefits that have been evident. So one can only assume that there are no benefits. To say we had a vote in 1975 about entering the EU is a falsehood, the majority of the public hadn't realised that Edward Heath had already signed on the dotted line a couple of years earlier, actually, the referendum was 'should we stay in the EU'. It was sold to the public as purely a common market for trade and job movement within Europe. The document displayed in
thEUnit.com website called 'Sovereignty and the European Communities' FCO 30/1048 - 1971, was an advisory document for ministers in respect of how the British public would take to the news of losing their sovereignty. This document was kept top secret for 30 years! So the full proposals of Britain losing its sovereignty was never released at the time of voting.
2. "There is also one argument, in particular, against holding such a referendum that we find irrefutably powerful, namely that most people in our country want to say neither ‘yes’ to everything from the EU, nor ‘no’ to everything." Mr Cameron knows that he is not delivering to the British public what they want, to be an independent country without being ruled by the EU, so he ignores what the majority of the people in Britain want. Where does this stand with democracy?
3. "The EU is not a matter of everything or nothing. We have, in the past, done well in ensuring that Britain can participate in the collective good carried out by the EU, such as free markets, while keeping out of things that we believe would be bad for our country. For example, we are not part of the Schengen Zone but have kept control of our own border controls, just as, crucially, we have kept the pound. And we should not lose sight of the EU’s very useful work, such as ensuring that all the nations of Europe are equipped to face the biggest challenges of the 21st Century: global competitiveness, global warming and global poverty. These are compelling arguments for why we believe Britain should be an active member." Although we didn't sign the Schengen Zone agreement, we have little control over our borders, as free movement between EU countries means that most people have headed for the UK where the benefits system has been a big draw. The EU made it policy a few months ago that welfare has to be paid to anyone who arrives on our shores from day one! The EU also plan to bring in their own border control. The EU are already in the process of taking over our coastguards, so there will be no control over our own coasts and borders at all in the future. Mr Mann's argument for the 'benefits' of global competitiveness, global warming and global poverty are almost laughable. Global competitiveness means they want a cheap labour workforce, probably one reason why we have no border control and few jobs given to British workers. Global warming is now a very questionable science with little or no evidence in its favour in respect of either the planet warming, or that carbon has any contribution to this. Carbon appears to be the new 'gold', the EU can deal in CER's (Carbon credits), another tax and something that will cripple any industry that Britain has left, as countries like China and India will not pay for carbon emissions. As for global poverty, whilst charity serves a purpose to help those in terrible need, bringing poverty to the donor nations is hardly right. As with the plans to tax the UK via carbon and 'green technology', draining money from the UK for foreign aid that is not even categorised properly, at a time of deep recession, is beyond belief. How will you explain why people will not be able to buy food or heat their homes in the UK Mr Cameron?
4. "The Government has also introduced a European Union Bill, currently before Parliament, which will give Parliament and voters more say over important EU decisions. This new legislation will ensure that if, in the future, there is a change to EU Treaties that move a power or an area from the UK to the EU, the Government of the day will have to ask for the British people’s consent in a national referendum before it can be agreed. This ‘referendum lock’ ensures that politicians in Whitehall will never again be able to hand over more power to Brussels without asking the British people first." This Bill is virtually useless, the treaties already signed ensure that EU laws override UK legislation and in the Lisbon Treaty there is Article 1-18 Flexibility Clause, which was signed by Gordon Brown. The Flexibility Clause allows anything not already covered in the treaty to be enforced. I say again, is this democratic?
5. "Of course, in its first year in office this Government has been highly active on many other EU issues. We have made a good start in bringing the hitherto inexorable rise of the EU budget under control, saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds. We have ensured that from 2013, Britain can no longer be liable from Eurozone bail-outs, another legacy from the Labour Government we have had to sort out" Our contribution to the EU budget has risen, not stayed the same or fallen. The EU also plan to tax us direct in respect of VAT and fuel etc., Mr Cameron is even on the brink of giving back our rebate, which Mrs Thatcher fought so hard for us to get.
6. "And we are pushing forward measures that will be of benefit to Britain: making sure an EU-South Korea Free Trade Agreement was reached, which will mean big new opportunities for British businesses; and ensuring that the lifting of regulatory burdens on businesses, particularly small businesses, is firmly on the EU agenda. We have achieved a good deal in getting the countries of the EU to use their collective weight in the world effectively, such as on tough, targeted sanctions on Iran or action to help countries moving towards democracy in the southern Mediterranean" Britain buys more from other EU countries than it sells to them, The fact that our businesses are failing is due to the red tape issued by Brussels, who tie enterprise in knots! Also boasting about bringing democracy to other countries is shameful, as the EU member countries are losing any democracy they ever had.
7. "The Prime Minister fully understands that our membership of the EU incites strong feels (sic) in many people. But I hope this goes some way to explaining why we believe that an in/out referendum would be highly unlikely properly to settle the question of Britain’s membership of the EU, and also how we are securing the best deal for British people through our active and positive membership, while ensuring that our national sovereignty is protected in the future. Please be reassured that the Prime Minister would never allow our country to slide into a federal Europe." I don't think that either Mr Mann or the Prime Minister has any idea how strong the British public feel about our membership of the EU. If there are 'best deals' why haven't we heard about them? Our sovereignty already appears to have been eroded via the 6 treaties signed since membership of the EU began, wasn't it just a few weeks ago that the government were alarmed to have to debate on wild animals being used in circuses in the UK, as they hadn't had directives from the EU on it? Exactly how much power has the government got left Mr Cameron?
I would love to hear from you, if you have any points to add, or you disagree with me about this letter from Mr Mann, maybe you can add some good points. Please register with this UKIP blog and send in your comments, you don't have to register with your real name if you don't want to.
Janet Clarke (Editor)
