Friday, 27 January 2012

If there exist a danger of an 'undemocratic' and dangerous EU........

........why the hell, exactly, are we still a member? An article has appeared on Conservative Home about statements made by William Cash, John Redwood and Bernard Jenkin, during the recent backbench debate on the European Council.


Cash maintains that: "A house divided against itself will fall, and the situation will be worse still if it is built on sand". Far be it for me to point out to such an august figure as William Cash, but the House of Westminster is divided (albeit by means of a large majority and a small minority) and it matters not whether it is built on sand or mud. Maintaining that the EU is 'undemocratic' (which we all knew, but thanks for 'informing' us) he also voices his fear that if something is not done to address this deficit in democracy it has the potential to present a breeding ground for the far right. Why only the 'far right'? Why should the 'far right' be the section of society singled out as potential trouble-makers? What, exactly, is it Cash is calling for? Is he in fact saying that making the EU 'democratic' is then acceptable and we should remain a member? 


We then have that 'renowned' eurosceptic, John Redwood, entering the discussion, stating that the present situation is a crisis of democracy. Err, how can an organisation renowned for being undemocratic have a crisis of democracy? Do we not have a 'crisis of democracy' in the UK? He complains, regarding the EU, that: "We see in some of these countries that the electorate change the Government but they do not change the policy". Has he looked at the UK lately? Did we not change our government and does not the policy remain? So Redwood's point is?


Last, we have Bernard Jenkin, another supposed eurosceptic, stating that we should 'divide and rule' (whatever the hell that means) "because it would be in our interests if the Euro succeeded with a democratic settlement in the European Union". So by practising 'divide and rule' it would be possible for the euro to succeed with a democratic settlement in an undemocratic organisation?


What exactly is it that these three men want? Do they want 'In' or 'Out'? Do they want to waste their time discussing a deficit of democracy in an organisation to which membership is not mandatory? Would they not be better discussing the deficit of democracy in their own country, a deficit compounded by our membership of the aforesaid organisation? 


I believe it was Autonomous Mind (or was it Richard North) who devised the description of 'plastic' when describing Conservative sceptic MPs. In these straightened times it behoves us to use our plastic sparingly. I have for some time been of the opinion the account on which these three cards were provided has long been out of credit so their continued availability is pointless - and we all know what to do with worthless cards, don't we?

4 comments:

Ian Hills said...

"In, out, in, out, shake it all about" - the europlastic anthem.

Richard said...

Who devised the description of 'plastic'?

Definitely Autonomous Mind.

right_writes said...

Did I read this right WfW, did Bill Cash use the term "far right"?

I thought this was the preserve of those scoundrels at the BBC.

There is nothing "right" about that label, rather if one is a denizen of the left, the idea that big business should be left in the hands of the men which run it, rather than be taken over by the state is the only difference between far left and a "little bit to the right of that"… aka fascism, or national socialism. Both concepts being about the idea that government knows better in every circumstance, and people should do as they are told.

In my view, the real "far right" is about the recognition that the only role of government is to provide and manage a smattering of administrative competence, according to the traditions and the will of the people… aka libertarianism, conservatism and to a lesser extent anarchism.

It seems a great shame that supposed conservative representatives cannot see that a community can exist without the dead hand of government exerting its baleful influence on our every waking moment.

What chance do we have when our bureaucrats only have to deal with children (as Richard might say)… ?

Of course, he is right, our target should be the bureaucracy, rather than the politicians, we should make our land ungovernable, the EU is merely an extension of this bureaucracy.

The problem is that bureaucracy is immortal, and we are not able to organise on that scale, or think on those terms.

WitteringsfromWitney said...

IH: Indeed!

Richard: Thank you - another senior citizen moment on my part......

r_w: You did indeed hear right! Fair comment by you.