The European Union

[purpleronnie]

I wondered what people think of the tories effectively blocking the £3 million fund allocated to the UK by the EU for food banks. 

 

Is this a knee jerk reaction in trying to be Anti EU in the face of UKIP gains?  If so it seems a ridiculous stance.

[davieG]

You will never get an unbiased view but then why would you want one? Everything is written by somebody and everybody has one view or another. Read from different sources and make your owning up based on what feels right to you.

I do and nothing feels right so I've ended up being a cynical, apolitical usually non-voting old git based on the fact I can't vote for people (parties usually) that i have no confidence in. 

[LJS]

Incidentally, when I say it has always been the case tat the EU has been after ever closer union it's worth saying that there are plenty who have been and who are supportive of the EU who don't want to go that far. A European superstate isn't inevitable. There are obviously a variety of views at play. Just as not all Tories want to start urban fox hunting and not all Labour people want to free the paedos.

[Zingari]

.

I can't comment about the political campaign as I wasn't born. But it is certainly the case that ever closer union has always been the ultimate aim of the EU and it's predecessors. Indeed the integration we have seen in latter years was initially planned for much earlier. The French vetoed what would have essentially been a single European military in 1954 and the single currency was meant to be in place as early as 1980 before economic stagnation put paid to it.

is the next step a one world government ? is there something that we should know now , or will it be only crystal clear in hindsight ?

[LJS]

I do and nothing feels right so I've ended up being a cynical, apolitical usually non-voting old git based on the fact I can't vote for people (parties usually) that i have no confidence in.

.

Stand for election. I'd probably vote for the cynical old git party.

[LJS]

is the next step a one world government ? is there something that we should know now , or will it be only crystal clear in hindsight ?

.

Who knows what the next step is? The ever closer union stuff isn't only clear in hindsight. It was there in black and white all along. Unfortunately access to information wasn't so easily accessible then, although I'm sure it would have been reported in some fora following the Treaty of Rome as it was a big deal. The EU hasn't conned anybody. I can't speak for Heath and chums.

[Zingari]

.

Stand for election. I'd probably vote for the cynical old git party.

davieG and Zingari , the dream ticket 

 

[Webbo]

.

Really? We can't do our own research? I don't know about you but I don't just take the word of politicians for stuff. More difficult in times past I'll grant you, but nobody on this forum can excuse ignorance. We all have internet access.

Of course politicians should be honest and I think the vast majority are. It's just that they have an agenda in line with their beliefs and that's the line they're bound to promote. We have to see past that. I'm a lefty but I get my news from sources across the political spectrum. I've no desire make choices on the basis of argument from only one perspective.

We didn't have the internet in the 70s and even now the best search engine in the world can't tell you the unspoken secret plans of politicians for the future.

[davieG]

.

Stand for election. I'd probably vote for the cynical old git party.

Too old and far too cynical. Politics and politicians make me feel ill and angry.  

davieG and Zingari , the dream ticket 

 

I'm the good looking one although the hair is somewhat flattering.

[Zingari]

.

Who knows what the next step is? The ever closer union stuff isn't only clear in hindsight. It was there in black and white all along. Unfortunately access to information wasn't so easily accessible then, although I'm sure it would have been reported in some fora following the Treaty of Rome as it was a big deal. The EU hasn't conned anybody. I can't speak for Heath and chums.

so are you saying we should have known what the steps were back then , but we can't possibly tell what the next steps will be or what is being planned  ?

 

don't you think someone will be saying the very same thing in another 30 years that it was all there for us if only we'd been paying attention ?

[Zingari]

We didn't have the internet in the 70s and even now the best search engine in the world can't tell you the unspoken secret plans of politicians for the future.

if they do,  very few  believe it . 

the NWO is coming , there will eventually be a one world government and it will creep in the very same door 

[Guest MattP]

Thatcher was euro sceptic in rhetoric only. She signed the SEA which was the greatest sacrifice of sovereignty to the European project up to that point and paved the way for Maastricht and the accelerated integration of the later 1990s.

 

I know hence I said "in her later years" - she did some fantastic stuff for the Spectator in the early 2000's, I don;t believe she was lying then just because she signed papers in the 80's.

 

No reason too.

[LJS]

so are you saying we should have known what the steps were back then , but we can't possibly tell what the next steps will be or what is being planned ?

don't you think someone will be saying the very same thing in another 30 years that it was all there for us if only we'd been paying attention ?

.

I'm saying you should have been made aware. The same argument won't stand scrutiny in thirty years. It would take you an hour to have a quick read of the history of the EU and the principles if it's most fervent supporters.

In thirty years it will be fair to say that 'it was all there if you'd only been paying attention'.

I know hence I said "in her later years" - she did some fantastic stuff for the Spectator in the early 2000's, I don;t believe she was lying then just because she signed papers in the 80's.

No reason too.

I misread, apologies.

[davieG]

!975, what good year for promises that was the common Market was exactly that a common market and the promise of cheap/virtually free fuel with the onset of North Sea Oil. Oh how we all believed politicians back then.

[l444ry]

It's good that a few people are starting to admit this, but we weren't all told.

 

Thatcher for example was very anti EU in her later years yet raved about it at the start of the common market, maybe it was just the socialists of europe who knew what it was really going to be and they didn't want to tell any of us?

 

I'm all for trade parts and relaxations of working agreements, when you start going towards countries not in control of borders, companies paying tax elsewhere despite profiting here and the ECHM decided who we can and cant deport is when you will get people deciding enough is enough.

 

Anything but, Matt!!

 

Labour was very anti when the Common Market (EU) was formed. The rules and regulations of the Treaty of Rome (on on subsidies and nationalisation) would make it more difficult for future Labour governments. The Tories saw the Common Market and the Treaty of Rome a capitalist club and as a barrier to Socialism.

 

Even into the Eighties it was in the Labour Manifesto to withdraw completely. Despite the vile media coverage and bias they took at the time, it's funny that Thatcher and Murdoch etc etc  all come round to the fact that Michael Foot was right all along.

[Smudge]

Anything but, Matt!!

 

Labour was very anti when the Common Market (EU) was formed. The rules and regulations of the Treaty of Rome (on on subsidies and nationalisation) would make it more difficult for future Labour governments. The Tories saw the Common Market and the Treaty of Rome a capitalist club and as a barrier to Socialism.

 

Even into the Seventies it was in the Labour Manifesto to withdraw completely.

No it wasn't. Labour promised to renegotiate the terms of membership and if successful have a referendum on it, which they did in 1975

[l444ry]

No it wasn't. Labour promised to renegotiate the terms of membership and if successful have a referendum on it, which they did in 1975

I'm perfectly aware of Labour Party history thank you Smudge. The 1983 Election Manifesto committed the Labour Party to withdraw from the EEC. Just before the 1975 referendum the Labour Party membership voted 2 to 1 to leave the EEC. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1R3TgChPsU

[Smudge]

Anything but, Matt!!

 

Labour was very anti when the Common Market (EU) was formed. The rules and regulations of the Treaty of Rome (on on subsidies and nationalisation) would make it more difficult for future Labour governments. The Tories saw the Common Market and the Treaty of Rome a capitalist club and as a barrier to Socialism.

 

Even into the Eighties it was in the Labour Manifesto to withdraw completely. Despite the vile media coverage and bias they took at the time, it's funny that Thatcher and Murdoch etc etc  all come round to the fact that Michael Foot was right all along.

A bit of nifty editing there Larry but you are still wrong in 1979 they made this statement and in 1987 they had three lines on the subject

 

1979

At this election, Labour will, once again, be the only major political party to offer the British people the prospect of bringing about fundamental and much-needed reform to the EEC.

We are concerned to ensure that Greece, Portugal, and Spain receive an early welcome into the Community. This enlargement of the Community will provide an opportunity to create a wider and looser grouping of European states, thus reducing the dangers of an over-centralised and over-bureaucratic EEC.

We aim to develop a Europe which is democratic and socialist, and where the interests of the people are placed above the interests of national and multinational capitalist groups, but within which each country must be able to realize its own economic and social objectives, under the sovereignty of its own Parliament and people.

A Labour Government will oppose any move towards turning the Community into a federation."

 

 

1987

Labour's aim is to work constructively with our EEC partners to promote economic expansion and combat unemployment. However, we will stand up for British interests within the European Community and will seek to put an end to the abuses and scandals of the Common Agricultural Policy. We shall, like other member countries, reject EEC interference with our policy for national recovery and renewal.

[Smudge]

I'm perfectly aware of Labour Party history thank you Smudge. The 1983 Election Manifesto committed the Labour Party to withdraw from the EEC. Just before the 1975 referendum the Labour Party membership voted 2 to 1 to leave the EEC. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1R3TgChPsU

That is not the manifesto to which you mentioned. That's a YouTube commentary about the cabinet being allowed to voice their own views. I'm getting deja vu all over again

[l444ry]

A bit of nifty editing there Larry but you are still wrong in 1979 they made this statement and in 1987 they had three lines on the subject

 

1979

At this election, Labour will, once again, be the only major political party to offer the British people the prospect of bringing about fundamental and much-needed reform to the EEC.

We are concerned to ensure that Greece, Portugal, and Spain receive an early welcome into the Community. This enlargement of the Community will provide an opportunity to create a wider and looser grouping of European states, thus reducing the dangers of an over-centralised and over-bureaucratic EEC.

We aim to develop a Europe which is democratic and socialist, and where the interests of the people are placed above the interests of national and multinational capitalist groups, but within which each country must be able to realize its own economic and social objectives, under the sovereignty of its own Parliament and people.

A Labour Government will oppose any move towards turning the Community into a federation."

 

 

1987

Labour's aim is to work constructively with our EEC partners to promote economic expansion and combat unemployment. However, we will stand up for British interests within the European Community and will seek to put an end to the abuses and scandals of the Common Agricultural Policy. We shall, like other member countries, reject EEC interference with our policy for national recovery and renewal.

You completely miss the point Smudge. I was attempting to make the point that the Tories (under McMillan) changed their whole outlook on the Common Market because it could be seen as a capitalist club. I then outlined that Labour Party opposed it for the same reason. 

 

The Left of the Labour Party gained ground from 1975-1983 culminating in the split and the formation of the SDP.

 

Under Michael Foot's leadership the 1983 manifesto clearly stated "We will also open immediate negotiations with our EEC partners, and introduce the necessary legislation, to prepare for Britain's withdrawal from the EEC, to be completed well within the lifetime of the Labour government." 

 

Using quotes from the Callaghan and Kinnock campaigns has no relevance to this position. There has always pro and anti's in all parties.

[Alf Bentley]

Anything but, Matt!!

 

Labour was very anti when the Common Market (EU) was formed. The rules and regulations of the Treaty of Rome (on on subsidies and nationalisation) would make it more difficult for future Labour governments. The Tories saw the Common Market and the Treaty of Rome a capitalist club and as a barrier to Socialism.

 

Even into the Eighties it was in the Labour Manifesto to withdraw completely. Despite the vile media coverage and bias they took at the time, it's funny that Thatcher and Murdoch etc etc  all come round to the fact that Michael Foot was right all along.

 

In the 1970s, Labour was very split on Europe, the left "anti" and the centrists "pro". By 1983, the left was dominant in the Labour Party and withdrawal from Europe was a 1983 manifesto commitment, contributing to the breakaway of the SDP and the Tory landslide in that election.....almost a mirror image of the Tories/UKIP in recent years, except the Tories haven't fallen to bits yet.

 

I was a youthful Labour activitist canvassing door to door in 1983. One bloke told me he normally voted for the National Front but would vote Labour to get Britain out of Europe. He also told me he'd repatriate me to Ireland (I'm British, of Irish parentage)!

 

It would be interesting to read some proper analysis on the reasons for Thatcher's landslide in 1983. While she'd won in 1979 on the back of disgust at the Winter of Discontent and Labour's inability to control the unions, she was pretty unpopular by about 1982, with mass unemployment etc. I suspect that withdrawal from the (then) EEC probably didn't harm Labour much. It was more (1) Internal Labour divisions & the SDP breakaway, with millions of centrist Labour voters voting SDP; (2) Other unpopular Labour policies, notably unilateral nuclear disarmament and renationalisation; (3) Some popular Tory policies, notably on council house sales (privatisations hadn't yet started, I don't think); (4) A wave of patriotism in the wake of the Falklands War.

 

The switch in policy on Europe by both parties seems quite logical to me, given the globalisation of world capitalism since then.

 

30 years ago, it was (just about) still credible for Labour to seek to make radical economic changes within the UK without everyone thinking that this would lead to a flight of capital, the destruction of economic competitiveness etc. 30 years ago, Europe offered expanded trade and business opportunities with a minimum safety net, so many centrist Tories were keen (except small-c conservative nationalists supporting empire/commonwealth). Now, many Tories want as unregulated a free market as possible, with as little of a safety net as possible, so the EU model of boosting economic/social convergence alongside trade is not for them. They prefer the US model of unregulated capitalism. Meanwhile, Labour has realised that any regulation of global capitalism needs to be continental, if not global in scale - there's little power over economic policy at the national level any more.

 

How the Tories handle their splits on the EU and the threat of UKIP (which could become "their SDP" at some point, under our electoral system) will be very interesting.... 

[Smudge]

You completely miss the point Smudge. I was attempting to make the point that the Tories (under McMillan) changed their whole outlook on the Common Market because it could be seen as a capitalist club. I then outlined that Labour Party opposed it for the same reason. 

 

The Left of the Labour Party gained ground from 1975-1983 culminating in the split and the formation of the SDP.

 

Under Michael Foot's leadership the 1983 manifesto clearly stated "We will also open immediate negotiations with our EEC partners, and introduce the necessary legislation, to prepare for Britain's withdrawal from the EEC, to be completed well within the lifetime of the Labour government." 

 

Using quotes from the Callaghan and Kinnock campaigns has no relevance to this position. There has always pro and anti's in all party's.

Fair enough Larry, I missed the 1983 one, I apologize.

[l444ry]

There really is no need to apologise Smudge but thanks all the same!!

[Strokes]

There really is no need to apologise Smudge but thanks all the same!!

As I stated before Larry, in not sure why anyone of a left persuasion would be pro European union.

Can I ask you Larry, throwing all previous party prejudices to one side how important an EU withdrawal is, in regards to the way you vote?

[l444ry]

As I stated before Larry, in not sure why anyone of a left persuasion would be pro European union.

Can I ask you Larry, throwing all previous party prejudices to one side how important an EU withdrawal is, in regards to the way you vote?

Put it this way Strokes. If Labour were to remain wedded to the EU project, I still wouldn't go running to put my cross by a UKIP candidate.