*

101 REASONS FOR LEAVING THE EU

 

We wish to express our indebtedness and gratitude to those who in books and articles have sought to alert the Nation to its Danger, and whose observations are reflected or summarised here: in particular,

 

Rodney Atkinson and Norris McWhirter

for Treason at Maastricht

 

Adrian Hilton for The Principality and Power of Europe

 

Lindsay Jenkins for The Last Days of Britain

And

 

For the late Lord Shore of Stepney’s

Separate Ways

 

 

 

Copies of this booklet can be obtained from the Publishers -Priced £1.20 incl p&p

 

St Mathew Publishing Ltd

24 Geldart St.

Cambridge

Tel: 01223 504871 Fax: 01223 512304

 

*

 

1. hush up

 

Cabinet papers pre - 1970 show the Heath government to have had full knowledge of the EEC being a long -term plan for the unitary European State with its own Currency; but the facts were suppressed by this and succeeding governments with the Deliberate intention of keeping the Nation in the dark

 

1.         ‘surrenders of sovereignty’’

 

On 14^th December 1960 the Lord Chancellor, Lord Kilmuir, Britain’s senior legal officer, warned Edward Heath of the implications of signing the Treaty of Rome:

‘’ To satisfy the requirements of the treaty, Parliament could enact legislation which would give automatic force of Law to any existing or future regulations made by… the Community…It is clear that the Council of Ministers could make regulations which would be binding on us even against our wishes… It is the first step on the road, which leads… to the federal state… I must emphasise that in my view the surrenders of sovereignty involved are serious ones…these objections ought to be brought out into the open.

 

2.         ‘end of Britain’’

 

That the consequences of membership had been realised by some at Westminster about this time is apparent from a speech in 1962 by Hugh Gaitskell, leader of the Labour party, who rightly identifying ‘’ the desire of those, who created the European Community, for a political federation. That is what they mean, that is what they offer’’, added that this would bring about the end of Britain as an independent [Nation State]…the end of a thousand years of history.

3.         the big lie

 

Edward Heath’s 1971 White Paper on joining the EEC deceived Parliament and the People with its false statements that’’ there is no question of any erosion of essential sovereignty’’, and that Britain’s Sovereignty would somehow be ‘’enlarged’’ by ‘sharing’’

 

4.         ministry of propaganda

 

Between 1970 and 1972 the Heath Government directed a secret propaganda offensive, known as the Connaught Breakfasts, in which Cabinet Ministers, Foreign Heads of Department, civil servants, media managers and journalists, in conjunction with the European Movement, carried on TV, radio and newspaper campaign to swing round strongly opposed public opinion to acceptance of the EEC, public money being used in the process.

 

5.         unconstitutional…1

 

The 1972 Act which took Britain into the EEC was in breach of the Constitution, in that the Government allowed no prior consultation of the electorate by special General Election or Referendum, as is required under the Constitution for Parliamentary measures involving Constitutional Change, the precedents being those of 1831/2 and 1910.

 

 

 

 

 

7. unconstitutional…2

 

By passing the 1972 European Communities Act, Parliament unconstitutionally attempted to renounce its legal Sovereignty, so as to make the British People subject to enactments of outside agencies, and ending its own ability to put into effect the expressed wishes of the Electorate.

 

8. unconstitutional…3

 

In doing so, it deliberately and wrongfully denied the, ultimate Sovereignty of the People, of which Parliament is Constitutionally both Servant and Defender and which at the end of each Parliament’s term is returned to its Possessors.

 

9.                     unconstitutional…4

 

It is the Corner Stone of the Constitution that no Parliament is or can be bound by enactments of its predecessors; but the Act of 1972 unconstitutionally purported (Section 2.4) to be mandatory upon all succeeding Parliaments.

 

 

 

10.               unconstitutional…5

 

 

The Act of 1972 is unconstitutional in the wider respect that falsehood and deception was employed to secure its enactment, contrary not only to the spirit of the Constitution but of all procedure whatsoever.

 

11. test case

 

The Metric Martyrs’ appeal against their conviction is based on the fact that the 1985 Imperial Weights &Measures Act, which permits trading in pounds and ounces, constitutionally takes precedence over the earlier Act of 1972 which made us members of the EU; and it is thus a test case not only between British and EU law, but of whether the 1972 Act can have abrogated the Constitution.

 

12.indestructible

 

Any supposition that the Act in some sense annulled the Constitution is untenable, since (apart from the 1972 Act itself being unconstitutional both in its content and process of enactment) the unique unwritten British Constitution is not law, but essentially an honoured undertaking and consensus in those who have created and live under it as to the proper conduct of Parliamentary affairs, and thus incapable of being set aside by legal means.

 

13. … twilight hour?

 

By subjecting the British people to decrees other than the laws enacted by their own legislature, the Act contravened the undertaking in the Coronation Oath ‘’ to govern the peoples of the United Kingdom according to their laws and customs’’; the provisions of the treason Act 1795, against engaging in actions ‘’tending to the overthrow of the laws, government and happy constitution’’ of the United Kingdom, and those of the Treason Felony Act of 1848 condemning ant who attempt to ‘’ deprive or depose our most gracious Lady the Queen from the style, honour or royal name of the imperial crown of the United Kingdom’’; and the Privy Counsellor’s Oath ‘’ To bear faith and allegiance to the Crown and defend its jurisdiction and power against all foreign…persons…or states.’’

 

14. royal commoner

 

Allegiance to H.M. the Queen is in effect allegiance to Brussels, since through the Queen’s EU citizenship and accountability in her own courts to superior EU law, Her Majesty has vassal status, and an Oath of Allegiance to her now stands’ subject to the Commission’s tolerance’’ so long as she and her Nation do not show themselves disloyal to the sovereignty of the European Union.

 

 

15. unconstitutionality

 

The chief reason for the Labour government’s calling a Referendum in 1975 was the unconstitutionality of the European Communities

 

16. bizarre

A retrospective Referendum upon an Act of Parliament was without precedent in British history, and partook of the nature of inertia salesmanship, especially since accompanied by the dispatching of government literature to every household with the disinformation that the Act had been purely a free trade agreement, and urging a ‘Yes’ vote; a species of official activity also without precedent, and just as questionable.

 

17. the great divide

Britain’s becoming and remaining a member of the EU, and the methods employed to his end, resulted from the emergence of what Lord Goodhart memorably described as ‘’ a political establishment’’ with purposes disturbingly opposed to the wish of the electorate; his book ‘Full-Hearted Consent (1976) ironically gaining its title from Mr Heath’s assurance during the 1970 General Election campaign that, if there were a future possibility of entering the EEC, no government would take their nation into it’’ without the full-hearted consent of Parliament and the People.

 

18. vote as EU please

 

The political establishment’s continuing activities have brought about a new situation, new to British politics, in which the widespread public hostility to the EU’s increasing encroachments is denied party political expression, the policies of the major parties all being favourable to membership.

 

19. polling days

 

In a nationwide MORI opinion poll carried out on behalf of the British Democracy Campaign 15-21 March, 2001, in which 1805 adult respondents were questioned face to face in their homes, 52% of these offered an opinion declared themselves in favour of leaving the EU now, 71% wanted a Referendum on continued membership, and 75% considered that the British people had not received sufficient information on the implications of the EU.

 

20. mobile goalposts

 

Through the deeper irregularity of its plan to proceed by stealth through a series of treaties until the European State was a fait accompli before its populations had come to realise what was going on, the EU has developed into a concept and institution far other than what was voted on in 1975 Referendum, and so without democratic validation in this as in other countries.

 

 

21. undemocratic

 

The European Union is an unrepresentative and authoritarian institution, by virtue of the fact that the members of the legislative (Council of Ministers) and its executive (Commission) are not directly elected by and responsible to the voters of a EU constituency.

 

22. non-accountable

 

The EU Council of Ministers is composed of the non-dismissible nominees of the governments of member states, who are thus removed from democratic accountability.

 

23. horse-trading

 

Britain’s voice in the Council is one amongst many; and policy decisions, as the outcome of conflict of interests and pressures resolved by bargaining, by no means necessarily correspond to Britain’s needs and the wishes of its electorate.

 

24. cabal

 

The Council, more strictly the legislative body, and the Commission, which with its executive roll also issues legislative proposals, both meet in secret; and since the fifty or so persons who compose the two have not been elected to European government functions, and in carrying them out are accountable to no-one, they constitutes, not a legislative, but a ruling oligarchy.

 

25. big brothers

 

Though the EU Commission are unelected appointees without democratic mandate or accountability, they have power to impose directives and regulations by by-passing the legislatures of democratic states.

 

26. the parliament: authority

 

Whereas the British Cabinet is constitutionally answerable to Parliament in Westminster, where a government defeat on a motion of no confidence involves a Dissolution and General Election, the European Union’s Parliament, so called, is entirely without such control over the Commission, which is effectively the EU Cabinet.

 

27. the parliament: finance

 

From its earlier days to the present, what has been confirmed the Westminster Parliament’s power has been its direction of finance; but the EU Parliament is without a corresponding capacity?

 

 28. the parliament: legislation

 

Unlike all the other parliaments in the Western tradition, the EU Parliament is unable to legislate, its functions being merely to review and agree measures drawn up by the Commission, and thereby to have virtually no legislative role.

 

29 the parliament veto

 

Nor does the Parliament have a final veto over Commission regulations and directives, since through the procedure euphemistically named ‘’Conciliation’’, the Commission can at its will override any negative vote.

 

30. façade

 

The word ‘’Parliament’’ is thus a misnomer for what is little more than a rubber-stamp or puppet agency; but the democratic election of its members creates the dangerous illusion of democracy being at work, in what is in essence an authoritarian regime.

 

31.      inferior government

 

Through its membership of the EU, Britain is being subjected to a species of non-representative, non-democratic, authoritarian government far inferior to that which prevailed at Westminster until 1973, and having features reminiscent of the dictatorial systems which flourished on the continent of Europe in the not very distant past.

 

32.      12-star chamber?

 

The European Court of Justice, whose members are appointed by the various governments, is the supreme arbiter on EU law, with power to overrule the laws of member states; but being charged under the Treaty of Rome with ensuring that provisions of all the EU treaties, and the principle of ‘’ever closer union’’, are observed, and in its own words devoted to ‘’overcoming the resistance of national governments to European integration’’, it is politically predisposed and active in a manner incompatible with judicial impartiality.

 

33.      moot points

 

EU treaties and regulations are generally cast in such obscure language that all wishing to be sure where they stand will be forced to go to the European Court of Justice: so that it will become an absolute source of political authority, and the European State be unassailably dominant over the former nations now its provinces.

 

34.      EU rules OK

 

EU law, as conveyed by the treaties, regulations and directives, and decrees and rulings of the European Court, are accepted by British courts as taking precedence over national law, the ECJ having declared that ‘’Every national court must apply Community law in its entirety and must accordingly set aside any provision of national law which may conflict with it, whether prior or subsequent to this Community rule’’ (ECR 629 at 643,644).

 

35.      ‘’tidal wave’’

 

The result is that the British Statute and Common law are being superseded, and law-making has become primarily the prerogative of the European Union, which has been described by a British judge as ‘’a bold new source of law’’, and whose legislation, according to the late Lord Denning, a former Master of the Rolls, is no longer’’ an incoming tide flowing up the estuaries of England’’, but’’ now like a tidal wave bringing down sea walls and flowing inland over our fields and houses, to the dismay of us all’’ (quoted in the Times, 1^st April 1996).

 

36. corpus juris

 

In place of existing laws in the member countries, there will have been instituted under the European State the Corpus Juris, a body of law largely in accordance with continental legal systems, deriving from three main sources: the Corpus Juris Civilis of the Roman Emperor Justinion, Inquisition law, and the Code Napoleon

 

37. euro state prosecutor

 

Corpus Juris is to be administered by the European State Prosecutor, and operate through European courts and trans-national police and the courts and police forces of member states, so combining police and prosecution into one entity

 

38. continental menu

 

Judicial procedure is to be as already in practice on the Continent, the European State Prosecutor having responsibility for investigation, arrest, committal to trial, presentation of the prosecution case in court, judgment and imposition of sentence, trial taking place before an inquisitorial judge and two professional assessors: the State, in effect, both judge and jury.

 

39. … innocent? Prove it!

 

Also as on the Continent, the concept of presumed innocence will disappear, and it will become the responsibility of the accused to prove his innocence to the court, contrary to the position under English law, where the burden of proof rests with the prosecution, and the accused is innocent unless and until proved guilty.

 

40.                   goodbye, Habeas Corpus

 

Corpus Juris will quash the right of Habeas Corpus, instituted in 1215 by Magna Carta (article 39), by which it is granted in perpetuity to all subjects of the monarch that no-one should suffer the loss of liberty without evidence warranting his further detention being established in a court hearing, normally within 48 hours of his arrest.

 

41. farewell, trial by jury

 

Corpus Juris will similarly abolish the right of trial by jury, whose beginnings date from as early as 1166 in the reign of Henry 11, through which the question of a person’s innocence or guilt is determined by twelve of his peers, not by the judiciary, a practice which, because of a jury’s freedom to acquit a person technically guilty under an unjust decree, ensures that laws made by the state are always acceptable to the people, and that government pressure upon, or corruption of, the judiciary shall never be able to affect the impartial administration of justice.

 

42. ‘ the test of civilisation’’

 

In a Minute to the Home Secretary of 21^st November, 1943, Winston Churchill observed: ‘’The great principles of Habeas Corpus and trial by jury… are the supreme protection invented by the British people for ordinary individuals against the State… The power of the executive to cast a man in prison without formulating any charge known to law for an indefinite period, is in the highest decree odious, and is the foundation for all totalitarian governments… Nothing can be more abhorrent to democracy. This is really the test of civilisation.’’

 

 

* * *

 

 

43. above the law

 

The European State’s judicial system involves the introduction of forces of armed police, whether members of Europol or of the paramilitary European border police in process of formation, enjoying diplomatic immunity from arrest, and thus above the law; unlike British police, who, while charged with enforcement of the, remain ordinary members of the public, themselves subject to the laws they uphold

 

44. clear enough

 

The reasons for the European State police’s immunity from the law have never been explained, though the parallel with the police forces of authoritarian regimes is manifest

 

45. just the start

 

Eurojust, the provisional EU public prosecution agency, which is closely linked to Europol, already has autonomous, non-accountable power to initiate investigations in every state of the European Union, Europol being able to order surveillance of any British person by letters, E-mail or ‘phone tapping, and to acquire upon demand secret intelligence from British security agencies M15 and M16.

 

46. affront

 

The concepts, provisions and methods of the judicial system of the emerging European State are legally and ethically inferior to the system of British justice admired throughout the world for its humanity and impartiality: and if ever instituted in Britain, would be a regressive and affronting imposition.

 

47. Euro Army

 

The future of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), founded upon the predominant military power of the United States, which has for more than half a century secured and maintained Europe’s peace, is now threatened by the European State’s establishing an Army of its own, dubbed the Rapid Reaction Force, upon the pretext that it will facilitate military operations in which NATO does not wish to take part.

48. pretext

 

Since arrangements already exist within NATO for the EU to take military action without NATO’s participation, but using its facilities, assets, transport and intelligence, the reasons for setting up a European Army can only be to confirm the emerging Statehood of the EU, and lessen the commitment of the United States to Europe’s security: so jeopardising NATO’s continuing role, and thereby the peace of Europe.

 

 

49. escape of cat

 

Helmut Kohl’s statement that ‘’ a united Europe without a common defence is, in the long run, not feasible’’(Independence, CIB, January 2000,p1) would seem to apply regarding the first; and that of Jacques Chirac, ‘’The object of a European defence identity is to contain the United States’’ (cited by Michael Fabricant, MP, House of Commons, 29^th March 2000), with respect to the second.

* *

 

CLICK HERE FOR PART 2

 

 

 

 

DESPOTISM is:

 

[‘ Everything by the EU- but nothing by YOU ’]

 

* * *

 

(More Reasons to follow shortly.) Or you may order a booklet from:

 

St Mathew Publishing Ltd

24 Geldart St. Cambridge

CB1 2lX

 

Tel: 01223 504871 or Fax: 01223 512304

 

 

 

* * *