Monday, 24 January 2011

More on the European Union Bill

Following my post yesterday on this subject, the European Scrutiny Committee have published their latest report prior to this afternoon's debate. Presumably also in advance of the debate and to 'make up the minds' of potential "Eurosceptic" MPs to support the Coalition, David Lidington, Minister for Europe, has a piece on Conservative Home. From Lidington's article, in which he states that the composition of the EU has changed from that at the time of its inception, comes this:
".....we can no longer simply trust governments to let voters in on the most important decisions made in their name in the EU......"
which promptly begs the question why not one of the three main political parties, whilst saying the people should have their requested referendum, have granted one. 

I have no idea how "learned" is Martin Howe, QC but I do have an inkling how "unlearned" is Lidington - which has been amply illustrated by the man himself . Only someone of Lidington's lack of intellectual stature could write:
"Most of the ways the EU might be given new powers to act will almost always be significant...."
All the ways whereby a transfer of any power, whether new or old, is always significant if any nation is to retain the right to independence to self-governance. The illogical aspect of that statement initially amazed me, but I quickly remembered that Lidington is a politician - and a Conservative one at that!

Lidington states that as a proud Tory the only revolution of which he approves is the Bloodless and Glorious of 1688 - he needs to be aware that the next revolution - and it will not necessarily be caused by matters EU - will, no doubt, not be "bloodless", but it will sure as hell be "Glorious"!


Woodsy42 said...

But WfW, have you read the comments? Virtualy nobody supports what he is claiming, which is quite refreshing (if probably useless).
For what it's worth I'll copy my comment to the original on conhome below. At least it got published, which is something.

I said...

We were promised a referendum, we want a referendum and there is no moral or technical reason why we should not have such a referendum.
This convoluted bill full of double speak and internal inconsistencies, from a govenment who have handed jusistiction of our country to the EU hand over fist since the election, is nothing but a useless and pathetic sop to the opinions of the disenfranchised people of this country. As such it is an insult to democracy.

WitteringsfromWitney said...

Woodsy: Its called listening to the people that they are supposed to represent! Honestly, what more could you expect?