17.7 C
London
Sunday, April 12, 2026
secret satire society
Home Blog Page 480

Lord Howard: Lack of Democracy in EU Hurting Business

 

 

Critical of the CBI’s record on the EU

‘In 1987 the CBI called for full UK membership of the European Monetary System. British membership of the ERM led to interest rates hitting 15% in 1992 and millions of homeowners going into negative equity. After the UK crashed out of the ERM in September 1992, on Black or White Wednesday, depending on your outlook, it enjoyed a sustained period of economic growth.

‘And in 1999, the CBI argued that joining the Euro would “deliver significant benefits to the UK economy”, including allowing British companies” to participate fully in a more complete and competitive single market” ( Sound Familiar ? ).

‘And there were dire predictions that, if we didn’t join, inward investment would dry up and the City would lose its place as a leading financial centre.

The arguments are all too familiar.’

 

Lack of democracy in the EU is hurting business

‘But if a government, having made its promises to the electors, is unable to keep those promises, not as a result of any conscious decisions on its part but as a result of the decision of some extraneous unaccountable body, such as the unelected European Commission or the unaccountable European Court of Justice, that crucial connection is broken. The lever which gives our people control doesn’t work.’

‘And because that increases the feeling of alienation which I described earlier it is a threat to us all, including business.’

 

The European Court of Justice has made us less safe

‘It is further increased by decisions of the European Court of Justice which make us less safe than we would otherwise be.

‘Among many such decisions, the Court has ruled that the Home Secretary is not allowed to refuse entry, or to deport, citizens of European countries who our courts have concluded are involved in terrorism.’

 

The CBI are ‘citizens of our country as well as businessmen and women.’

‘You are citizens of our country as well as businessmen and women.’

You want to be safe just as the rest of us do. And if you cannot carry out your business in a safe environment you will suffer the consequences, as business people as well as citizens.’

 

Set out the economic gains of a Vote to Leave

‘At the moment, every UK business must comply with “single market” legislation, even though just 5% of British firms export to the EU. This is a system which has an inherent tendency to produce disproportionate burdens on small companies, impeding their competitiveness.

‘And if we Vote Leave we can take back the power to make our own trade agreements. At the moment we have no trade deals with India, China, Brazil-or even Australia and New Zealand. We have to wait for 27 other member states to agree before we can arrange a single trade deal.

‘And to those who say that that trade with the EU will fall off a cliff if we leave I commend the words of the Prime Minister.  “If we were outside the EU altogether…” he said “….of course the trading would go on.

‘You could look at it this way.

‘If we left the EU with no trade deal-inconceivable given the tariff free zone from Iceland to Turkey- our exports would face EU tariffs averaging just 2.4%. But our net contribution to the EU budget is equivalent to a 7% tariff. Paying 7% to avoid 2.4% is mis-selling on a scale that dwarfs the scandal of PPI.’

Most New Jobs in the Last Year Went to EU Nationals

0

 

 

 

Commenting on the publication of the latest UK Labour Market statistics by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), Iain Duncan Smith MP said:

 

‘Our labour market is thriving, but it’s notable that more than three quarters of the rise in employment over the last year has come from people born abroad.

‘The truth is that it is Brits on low pay – and those out of work – who feel the consequences of uncontrolled migration. They are forced to compete with millions of people from abroad for jobs, and they suffer downward pressure on their wages.

‘The only way to take back control of our borders, economy and democracy is to Vote Leave on 23 June. That way we can have a fair migration policy that allows us to bring in the skills we need while investing in home-grown talent. A Vote to Leave also means we can take back control of the £350 million we hand to Brussels every week, and spend it on our priorities instead.’

 

The number of EU nationals working in the UK has increased by 224,001 in the last year alone, the equivalent of a city the size of Portsmouth.

 

The figures show that the number of EU nationals working in the UK in the first quarter of 2016 was 2,145,686. This is an increase of 93,726 from the last quarter of 2015 and an increase of 224,001 from a year ago. The annual increase is the equivalent of a city the size of Portsmouth.

The number of EU citizens working in the UK is up from 1,091,731 from the first quarter of 2010, an increase of 1,053,955 (ONS, 18 May 2016, link). This is the equivalent of a city the size of Birmingham.

The rate at which EU citizens are being added to the workforce is increasing. Between the first quarter of 2012 and the first quarter of 2013, just 24,291 EU citizens were added to the workforce.

As the ONS states ‘the number of non-UK nationals from outside the EU working in the UK has been broadly flat but the number of non-UK nationals from EU countries working in the UK has continued to increase’.

eu employment uk

Most new jobs in the last year went to EU nationals. The ONS explicitly states this is linked to the EU accessions.

 

The ONS states that in the last year, ‘UK nationals working in the UK increased by 185,000 to 28.15 million… non-UK nationals working in the UK increased by 229,000 to 3.34 million‘.

This means that 55.3% of new jobs went to non-UK nationals. The overwhelming majority of the increase was due to EU citizens. 54% of the total increase was due to EU citizens.

The ONS states that ‘Looking at changes in non-UK nationals working in the UK between January to March 1997 (when comparable records began) and January to March 2016: the number of non-UK nationals working in the UK increased from 928,000 to 3.34 million… the proportion of all people working in the UK accounted for by non-UK nationals increased from 3.5% to 10.6%… this increase in non-UK nationals working in the UK reflects the admission of several new member states to the European Union (EU)’.

412,000 persons were added to the UK workforce in the last year. 94,000 were born in the UK (22.91%). The remainder were born outside the UK, including 252,000 born in the rest of the EU.

 

Unemployment and the claimant count are falling: the Government’s claims about the impact of the referendum are falling apart.

 

The ONS states that: ‘The unemployment rate for those aged 16 and over for January to March 2016 was 5.1%. This was: unchanged compared with October to December 2015 [and] down from a year earlier (5.6%)’.

The Government previously claimed that rises in unemployment were down to the EU referendum and the fear of a leave vote. Despite the polls remaining constant, there has now been a decline in unemployment – this is embarrassing for the Government.

The claimant count is also falling. The ONS states that: ‘For April 2016 there were 737,800 people claiming unemployment related benefits. This was: 2,400 fewer than for March 2016 [and] 57,600 fewer than for a year earlier’.

The number of vacancies is rising year on year. The ONS states that ‘The number of vacancies for February to April 2016 was 13,000 more than for a year earlier’. The Education Secretary, Nicky Morgan, has claimed: ‘firms are already cutting back on advertising jobs because of their fear of a Brexit’.

Ex HSBC CEO Comments on Leaked Serco Letter to PM During EU ‘Renegotiation’

 

 

READ FULL LEAKED SERCO SOAMES TO PM LETTER HERE

 

Commenting on the leaked letter from the head of Serco to David Cameron, Michael Geoghegan (ex CEO of HSBC) said:

‘It’s laughable, and very telling, that No10 won’t comment on this correspondence.

‘The reality is that the whole re-negotiation of the U.K relationship with Europe – on which this government won the general election – is beginning to show all the hallmarks of a complete sham.

‘All of Europe knows it, and for the Prime Minister to continue to pretend otherwise runs the risk that the British People will lose confidence in the integrity of this government. I know from my time in the city that there is extreme pressure from the establishment to stay quiet on these occasions – but there is a limit.

‘The reality is the the CEOs of the banks know all too well that the weakness of Sterling has nothing to do with Brexit and all to do with the financial markets lack of confidence in investing in UK based on the Government’s track record to date.The Governor may well be right, interests rates may well go up but not because of Brexit but because as the Governor has said before UK relies on foreigners to fund its ever increasing debts and they already don’t like the trends they are seeing in the economy and they certainly won’t like now the slightest whiff of duplicity. For this reason alone it is vital that the Prime Minister comes completely clean and explains whether he did or did not negotiate in the true negotiating commitments that he got elected on.’

The EU Schengen Zone Encourages ISIS, ISIL

1

Already, according to the EU’s own Frontex group, ISIS have infiltrated the EU’s celebrated Schengen zone. There are an estimated 5,000 Jihadi cells waiting within Europe right now, and things are going to get a lot worse thanks to the caught-in-the-headlights EU leaders who are dismissing the danger just to keep the failed project limping along.

EU Free Movement Zone For Terrorists

What the EU is doing, is endangering its own citizens’ lives so that they can keep their little vanity project up and running, and because of this, there will inevitably be further attacks like Paris and Brussels.

The Syrian crisis has been utilised by Jihadis using false passports and documents to move people into the EU. Once in at any port of entry, they have free movement to any city within Europe and possibly Britain. The Paris attacks were proof of this when forged documents from Syria were found on the attackers.

‘Dodgy’ Dave

The PM, David Cameron is knowingly misleading the British public when he says that ‘leaving the EU will encourage ISIS’, on the contrary, remaining in the EU will inevitably lead to further closer union in the EU for Britain, as well as adopting the euro currency, Britain will have to completely open the borders of the UK and join Schengen fully. This will increase danger to the UK and its citizens ten fold, as well as increase gun smuggling and weapons through Britain’s porous borders. With free visa travel from Turkey’s borders to the UK, the terrorists will flow in from the war zones.

Even Remain’s Theresa May has questioned Cameron’s reckless disregard for security.

What the Remain camp wants is the abolishment of Britain’s borders completely, flooding Britain with migrants at a pace never before witnessed. This action alone, is probably a terrorists dream, and David Cameron knows it, he is willingly endangering the lives of UK citizens, purely for his EU centric dodgy deals with corrupt business owners.

If you vote remain in EU, you not only sell out Britain but you open the country up to more terrorism from the EU’s porous borders. ISIS will champion you for voting to remain in the EU because it will make it easier for them to attack Britain, especially after all control of our country has been ceded to Brussels. Slow to act in any emergency situation, Brussels is a danger to itself, as much as ISIS is a danger to the EU.

Constitutional Crime: David Cameron Deliberately Misled Parliament

1

The Prime Minister has committed the highest constitutional crime by deliberately misleading parliament during his make-believe EU negotiations.

Under Britain’s constitution, misleading parliament is the knowing contempt of parliament and ministers are punished with expulsion from their post and party. In the 1960s the Profumo affair was instrumental in bringing down the government of Harold MacMillan.

READ FULL LEAKED SERCO SOAMES TO PM LETTER HERE

There is no trust in David Cameron any more, not among the people or the House.

The leaked Serco letter is proof that David Cameron not only misled the people during his little EU negotiation charade, but he also misled parliament by holding an EU Referendum whilst cynically making dodgy deals with corrupt business leaders behind everyone’s back.

Cameron’s EU renegotiation bid was ‘fiction’ as he had already decided to campaign for a remain vote.

The secret ‘mobilisation’ plan involved asking FTSE 500 companies to put in their annual reports warnings about the dangers of Brexit.

The strategy was discussed in a letter from Serco boss Rupert Soames to Mr Cameron 11 days before the latter’s renegotiation deal with the EU was complete. This followed a meeting a few days earlier.

The PM had been telling the Commons that he ‘ruled nothing out’ unless he won concessions from the EU.

There is no going back now in trust. David Cameron is in contempt of the constitution and parliament with his blatant lies and corrupt behaviour.

He only has one alternative now and that is to resign immediately pending a serious investigation into his misconduct.

“The procedure for expulsion is that a motion is moved, generally by the Leader of the House, “that … be expelled from this House”. It is customary, depending on the circumstances, that a Member be ordered to attend to offer an explanation. However, if it is apparent that no possible excuse could be given, then the order to attend is not made.

“Should the Member be already in prison for the offence, then the prison governor may be ordered to bring the Member before the House: however in the case of Mr Baker (see below) no order for attendance was made. An expelled Member may seek re-election to the House, even within the term of the same Parliament that elected him, a principle established in 1782 as a result of the case of John Wilkes, who was expelled three times and once had his return amended in favour of his defeated opponent.

“There have been three instances this century of expulsion: Horatio Bottomley (Independent, South Hackney), was expelled in August 1922, after being convicted of fraudulent conversion of property and sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment.

“Garry Allighan (Labour, Gravesend) was expelled on 30 October 1947, for lying to a committee and for gross contempt of the House after publication of an article in the World’s Press News accusing Members of insobriety and of taking fees or bribes for the supply of information.

“Peter Baker (Conservative, South Norfolk) was expelled on 16 December 1954, after being sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment for forgery. In this instance, the motion for expulsion need not have been moved: under the provisions then still in force of the Forfeiture Act 1870, he would have been automatically disqualified.

“These provisions were amended by the Criminal Law Act 1967. A person convicted of treason is disqualified for election to, or if already a Member of sitting and voting in, the House or its Committees. (Forfeiture Act 1870, amended by the Criminal Law Act 1967). This disqualification remains in force until either the sentence has expired or a pardon has been granted.

“The provisions of the Forfeiture Act have only once been invoked. In 1903 Arthur Lynch (Nationalist, Galway City) was convicted of high treason for fighting against the Crown in the Boer War. The House was advised by the then Attorney General (Sir Robert Findlay), that as Mr Lynch was automatically disqualified by the Forfeiture Act, it was not necessary for the House either to consider the judgement or move a motion for expulsion. Instead the House immediately proceeded to discuss and move a motion for a new writ for a by-election (see HC Deb, 4th Series, vol 118, c1121 1148, 2 March 1903). Lynch’s sentence to death was commuted to penal servitude for life. He was released on licence in 1904 and received a free pardon from the Crown in 1907. He returned to the House as Member for West Clare in 1909, until his retirement in 1918. He unsuccessfully contested Battersea South for Labour at the 1918 General Election.

“Members may of course be de-selected by their constituency or national party, or asked to resign immediately according to the practice of the parties concerned. The parliamentary party may withdraw the whip, which effectively isolates a Member from the party machinery within the House, or indeed expel the Member from the Party.

“The most recent occurrence of this was the expulsion of the Member for Brent East (Mr Ken Livingstone) from the Labour Party for standing as an independent in the election for London Mayor. A Member does not lose his or her seat as a result and continues to sit, either as an independent, or as a Member of a different political party if they so choose.”

 

Andrea Leadsom: “The Choice the UK Now Faces is to Accept a Largely Unreformed EU, or Choose the Route of Freedom and Democracy”

0

“We published the Fresh Start ‘Mandate for Reform’ – it was a brief summary that even someone with only the most basic knowledge of the issues could understand.  It proposed 22 structural reforms that would have transformed the EU, yet left its core ambitions intact.

“I am a huge supporter of David Cameron and I genuinely have nothing but praise for his effort at convincing other EU leaders to accept the need for reform.

“But did we get anything like the sort of reform that would make the EU work better? No. Not even close.  And worse, even with the certainty of a UK referendum following the negotiation, it is clear that there was no appetite amongst European leaders for anything more than a few minor concessions.

“So imagine the disappointment of so many MPs at the choice that now lay before us – accept a largely unreformed EU, where we have no control over the knock on effects of Eurozone integration and the EU migration crisis.

“Or choose the route of freedom and democracy in the certain knowledge of an  almighty battle ahead with an ‘Establishment’ who would stop at nothing to frighten voters into submission.

“Most (but not all) of the Fresh Start team have now chosen to take back control and I applaud them for that.

“I truly believe the UK’s best days lie ahead of us as an independent, free trading, globally competitive nation. The facts are absolutely on our side. We speak the world’s international business language; our contract law is world class and our judicial system is one of the least corrupt in the world.

“Our economy is the world’s fifth biggest, behind only the US, China, Japan and Germany. London, home to 9 million people, has had top ranking for the last 4 years in a row on the Global Power City Index.

“And of course there is the Commonwealth of 2.2 billion consumers, where much of the world’s fastest economic growth is taking place, and where huge opportunities lie for new British trade links.

“And it’s not just our economic achievements that point to a bright future. The Times World University Rankings includes 3 UK universities in its top ten.

“We are a founding member of NATO and hold one of the five permanent seats on the UN Security Council. Leaving the EU will not change that, and we will continue to have the fourth largest military budget in the world.

“So the battle is joined, and the Fresh Start project has turned its attention away from reform and instead to answering the question on everyone’s lips:  what does it mean if we leave the EU?

“We plan to publish, over the next couple of weeks, a series of papers on what leaving the EU might look like.  We will be talking about how remaining in the EU will affect us, how the transition period of our exit might look, and then, a flavour of what our options will be once we get back our freedom to choose.

“And today, as Energy Minister, I want to kick off by talking about my own sector.

“It’s well known that there are three critical considerations that are always at the forefront of our energy policy. Often referred to as ‘the energy trilemma’, they are:

“Keeping the lights on;

“Keeping the cost of bills down;

“Moving to a clean energy future;

“And the fact is that we are world leaders in the development of new, low carbon technologies. Not only that, but our emissions reduction ambitions, set out in our own UK Climate Change Act of 2008, are world leading.

“So let me be very clear.  Absolutely none of this is threatened by the UK voting to leave the EU on June 23rd.

“Put simply, the lights will not go out, bills will not go up, and decarbonisation will not stall as a result of leaving the EU.  Where electricity and gas are concerned, ongoing security of supply will always be a red line for the UK and I want to briefly address both.

“The truth is that the vast majority of our electricity is home grown, and we have made enormous strides towards lowering our carbon emissions. In fact, 24% of our electricity now comes from renewable sources.

“The electricity we get from elsewhere – from countries both in the EU and beyond – is through interconnectors, privately owned by companies. Let’s be very clear here. Businesses do business with each other and the electricity flows through interconnectors in the most profitable direction, so everyone benefits. No one can reasonably claim that our electricity would somehow be switched off by a European politician trying to punish the UK for voting to leave.

“Even more vital than electricity to our economy is our use of gas. Over 80% of us use gas for heating and cooking, and again the UK is on very secure supply footing. There is a global wholesale market with plentiful sources of liquified natural gas – totally unrelated to membership of a political bloc.

“Forty percent of our gas supplies come our own North Sea reserves, with the rest mostly coming from Norway and the Middle East. Unlike some other EU Member States, we are not dependent on Russia for our gas.

“But, and this is a huge but…….What those on the remain side must answer is this:  How will you deal with the very real threat our continued membership of the EU will have on our energy security?

“And here’s the rub.  The European Commission’s ‘Winter Package’, contains a number of proposals which make painfully clear the direction of travel in EU energy policy.

“Two of those suggestions pose a potential threat to our continued energy security.

“First, we will be required in future to ask the Commission for approval before negotiating new gas deals with international partners, leaving us possibly reliant on a group of unelected Eurocrats, further diminishing our freedom to act in our own best interests, and certainly delaying our ability to respond in an emergency.

“But secondly, and of deep concern, there is a specific proposal by the Commission to require member states to take on legal responsibility for each other’s gas security.  To quote directly from the Commission’s report: ‘under the so called solidarity principle, an EU country in trouble would see gas supplies to its households and essential services ensured by neighbouring EU countries’.

“So the wording is clear. If we remain to become part of the ‘Energy Union’, and another Member State faces problems with their gas security – perhaps because of a political dispute with a supplier – we will be required to deprive our own small businesses of energy here at home.  Whilst we have a voluntary arrangement with Ireland on energy security, this EU proposal goes much further and takes control entirely out of our hands.

“The tragedy is that this has always been a red line for us – as we always say, energy security is not negotiable. But it appears this will soon change, and what’s more, the decision will be taken under qualified majority voting, which means we have virtually no chance of resisting it.  Just as we are penalised by the EU when our economy does well by having our EU budget contributions revised upwards, so too will our energy security be damaged by the EU because of the very fact that we have worked so hard to ensure it.

“These issues should matter to every family and every business, and I think gives a strong push towards the path of freedom, democracy and self-determination.

“So what if we leave?  Are there benefits for our energy policy?  Well, as I’ve set out this morning, remaining in the EU carries big risks, whilst leaving the EU does not threaten any of our key energy goals.

“So now to the opportunities of a vote to leave: there is an area of energy policy where leaving could really help the UK bill payer.  And that is in getting away from the huge restrictions of EU State Aid rules.

“We’ve seen only recently how help for our steel sector is subject to EU State Aid, making it not only difficult, but also painfully slow to save our steel!

“We’ve also seen how the EU’s control over VAT levels has meant the Treasury having to hold a review of VAT on solar panels – with a proposal to raise it upwards from 5% to 20%.   If we refuse to do it, they can take us to court.

“And, less well known, but a huge thorn in my side every day, is the need to get EU State Aid approval if we want to make any policy choices about our energy mix.  So the Capacity Market that ensures our electricity supply, the Contracts for Difference auctions that support new renewables, even our new nuclear ambitions, all have to be approved under EU State Aid, a process that can take months or even years leaving us unable to efficiently address issues of value for the bill payer.

“Leaving the EU will give us freedom to keep bills down, to meet our climate change targets in the cheapest way possible, and of course, keep the lights on.

“So this, then, is the first in the series of Fresh Start assessments of the reality of voting to leave.

“I, and my Fresh Start Colleagues, believe that the UK has a superb future waiting for us outside the EU.  We will be doing everything we possibly can to convince our fellow voters to choose the path of independence and democracy by voting Leave on June 23.”

Boris Johnson on Leaked Serco Letter – “This is the Biggest Stitch Up Since the Bayeux Tapestry”

4

 

 

Weasel Cameron was plotting anti-Brexit campaign during ‘EU renegotiation’

Commenting on the leaked letter from Serco’s Chief Executive to the Prime Minister orchestrating big businesses to back the IN campaign, Boris Johnson MP said:

READ FULL LEAKED SERCO SOAMES TO PM LETTER HERE

‘This is the biggest stitch up since the Bayeux Tapestry. It stinks to high heaven. FTSE 100 chiefs are seeing their pay packets soar while uncontrolled immigration is forcing down wages for British workers.

 

‘Now we learn that some fat cats have been secretly agreeing to campaign for remain while angling for lavish Government contracts. It makes us look like a banana republic. And it is also now beyond doubt that the so called renegotiation was a fiction designed to bamboozle the public. It was a meaningless mime, a ritual, a kabuki drama in which the outcome was utterly preordained. This is not the far-reaching and fundamental reform we were promised.

 

‘The only safe way to take back control of our borders and our democracy is to Vote Leave on June 23.’

Major General Tim Cross Responds to Sir Richard Dearlove’s ‘Turkey Visa’ Comments

0

Giving arrivals from Turkey visa-free entry to Europe would be like ‘storing gasoline next to the fire’, says former head of MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove.

Responding to Sir Richard Dearlove’s comments, Major General Tim Cross – senior British officer in the Coalition Provisional Authority following the 2003 Iraq war – said:

 

‘It is surely undeniable that the scale and pace of immigration into Europe over the last few years has become an increasingly serious issue; and that it will continue to be so in the years ahead. Self-evidently the way we respond to the migration numbers needs compassion set alongside control, with an acknowledgement of a genuine need to protect the receiving societies and communities. If we fail to apply asylum rules robustly whilst humanely refusing entry or deporting those who do not qualify then the backlash against immigration described by Dearlove will only get worse.

‘At its heart our dilemma is how we balance British ‘values’ and ‘interests’ and how best we, the UK, can maintain some sort of control over our destiny. We also need to be clear as to whether or not our values and interests are the same as other European countries – countries like Germany, for example, which has a serious demographic problem. Their falling population, with large parts of the old East Germany relatively empty, stands in stark contrast to the heavily populated south of the UK.

‘The EU’s response so far has been reactive and divided, driven mostly by emotion – as epitomised by Chancellor Merkel’s confused and high handed actions, both initially and then subsequently in the discussions with Turkey. Trying to solve the problem of mass migration by agreeing to allow visa free access to Turkey is indeed, as Dearlove notes, perverse.

‘We also need to manage the emerging threats. It is clearly difficult to know the actual numbers but it has been estimated that for every 1000 migrants entering Europe illegally there are 2 extreme Jihadi’s amongst them – which means that several thousand IS fighters have probably entered Europe over the last year or so. It is worth remembering that at the height of the ‘Troubles’ in N Ireland the hard, inner core of terrorists was never more than a few hundred strong. The idea that the phones will stop ringing in our security agencies and police headquarters if we should have the temerity to vote to leave the EU is plainly ridiculous – it will be in everyone’s interests to ensure that co-operation across the EU will continue to thrive.

‘All choices carry consequences – and the choice on June 23rd may not be an easy one. But ducking the issue, taking the easy way out, or deciding not to decide is simply not valid. The key question is will the UK be able to maintain control of its interests – including its borders – inside or outside of an EU that is failing its people on far too many issues – including immigration. And my answer is that we are better out.’

 

Major General Tim Cross was senior British officer in the Coalition Provisional Authority following the 2003 Iraq war.

Osborne’s Event Nose Dives as Fellow Campaigner Describes the EU as an ‘Evil Empire’

Responding, Vote Leave Chief Executive, Matthew Elliott said:

 

‘These warnings lack credibility given that Mr O’Leary said the complete opposite just a few months ago.

 

‘George Osborne appeared today alongside one man who thinks that the EU is an evil empire and another who said that the Chancellor does not understand economics.

 

George Osborne is panicking about his failing campaign so he is resorting to ever more lurid scare stories. His problem is that he’s told so many tall tales that people no longer believe what he and David Cameron say on the EU any more.’

 

Here are the FACTS

 

The Chief Executive of Ryanair has previously been highly critical of the EU and admitted air fares would not rise if we take back control.

Michael O’Leary of Ryanair has previously been very critical of the EU, which he has called an ‘evil empire‘:

‘You work in the Commission and pay higher prices by law because, let’s face it, the European taxpayer is going to pay for it anyway. The European Union spends most of its time either suing me, torturing me, criticising me or condemning me for lowering the cost of air travel all over Europe and making life really difficult for their favourite airlines… Any hint of innovation is left at the door when you walk in to become politicians and bureaucrats…. It’s certainly not going to be a conference held in Brussels, where the last innovative idea came in 1922’.

O’Leary previously said that ‘Will a Brexit on its own cause air fares to rise? No‘. His current warnings therefore are simply not credible.

 

The Head of British Airways has said airfares will not go up if we Vote Leave and that British airlines will still be able to fly between countries within the EU.

The head of British Airways’ parent company, Willie Walsh, has made clear he does not foresee leaving the EU as ‘having any impact on our business’.

Bjorn Kjos, Chief Executive of Norwegian Air, was asked whether he would employ fewer people in the UK in the event of a vote to leave. He said: ‘no’. He was asked whether he would fly fewer routes. He said ‘no’. He was asked whether airfares would go up. He replied ‘No, I don’t think so. We are here providing low fares to everybody… whether you are in the EU or not that’s not the problem’.

ryanair strongerin

There are serious questions about the aircraft that has been painted with the Britain Stronger in Europe (BSE) campaign’s slogan, ‘stronger safer & better off in Europe’ (sic).

Ryanair has not registered as a ‘permitted participant‘ with the Electoral Commission.

This means it is unlawful for Ryanair to incur more than £10,000 on ‘Advertising of any nature (whatever the medium used)’, ‘The provision of any services or facilities in connection with press conferences or other dealings with the media’, and ‘Rallies and other events, including public meetings… organised so as to obtain publicity in connection with a referendum campaign or for other purposes connected with a referendum campaign‘.

Estimates of the cost of painting an aircraft are over $50,000. Ryanair is thus acting in an illegal and unlawful manner during this current EU referendum contravening the law.

 

EU membership undermines international cooperation in aviation.

In December 2011, the European Court upheld a Directive which allowed the EU to regulate aircraft registered in third countries while they were in transit in international airspace.

These attempts to extend the EU’s jurisdiction extraterritorially could place airlines under conflicting regulatory obligations and are liable to undermine international cooperation.

The Association of European Airlines has suggested that the EU’s policies could cause ‘a trade conflict between the EU and third countries’.

 

The Chancellor’s claim that trade would fall by £200 billion in the event of a vote to leave are contradicted by the Prime Minister who dismissed such warnings as ‘scaremongering’.

The Prime Minister, David Cameron, has admitted: ‘If we were outside the EU altogether, we’d still be trading with all these European countries, of course we would … Of course the trading would go on … There’s a lot of scaremongering on all sides of this debate. Of course the trading would go on’.

The UK’s former Ambassador to the EU and leading supporter of the BSE campaign, Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, has admitted: ‘there is no doubt that the UK could secure a free trade agreement with the EU. That is not an issue‘.

Even the pro-EU CBI has said: ‘the UK is highly likely to secure a Free Trade Agreement with the EU, and such an agreement would be likely to be negotiated at an extremely high level of ambition relative to other FTAs [free trade agreements]’.

The pro-EU Centre for European Reform has accepted that, ‘given the importance of the UK market to the eurozone, the UK would probably have little difficulty in negotiating an FTA’.

 

Being in the EU means that we have lost control of our air transport policy.

Being in the EU means that the UK has lost control of air transport. Under the EU Treaties, the EU institutions have the power to make laws on air transport. The UK does not have a veto. A vote to leave will make the UK a more influential voice for international cooperation, since we will regain our right of veto.

The EU is increasingly attempting to supersede the UK’s voice in the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The Commission argues that ‘a more co-ordinated EU external aviation policy is the logical consequence of the EU internal market and associated common rules’. Since aviation policy is an EU competence, the EU can force the UK to adopt common EU positions in the ICAO. The safer option is to Vote Leave and to take back control of aviation policy.

 

Those campaigning on the same platform today have previously said they cannot be trusted on the economy. We should not listen to their advice now.

Ed Balls has previously said the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s economic policies are ‘irresponsible, and dangerous‘.

Osborne has said ‘for the last decade in the good years, Germany fixed the roof when the sun was shining and he [the Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls] did not when he was in government’ (ITV News, 17 May 2012, link).

Vince Cable has said the Chancellor is ‘extremely cynical’, and that he ‘didn’t really engage with economic stuff – he took that from the Treasury. The economy turned out alright, but I don’t think that was because of him‘.

Vince Cable has also condemned George Osborne’s austerity agenda, talking about the need to protect ‘the things you will take a cleaver to’.

Ed Balls has previously said of Vince Cable that: ‘The business secretary knew this plan would fail. He now knows he is deeply implicated in the failure, but he doesn’t have the courage to stand up and say it. No wonder in yesterday’s Budget he was ignored. It is a personal tragedy as well as a national tragedy’.

 

Mass Unfettered Immigration Creates Perpetual Cultural Conflict Eventually Leading to War

0

The European Union is creating a state of permanent internal conflict and war by enabling a system wherein the indigenous population of nations are replaced by others who hold completely opposing cultural practices and beliefs.

This dangerous process creates a climate of perpetual never ending fear, conflict, hatred and ultimately leads to constant civil unrest eventually leading to all out war.

Sanctioned appropriation of a whole population by another invading force creates an atmosphere of resentment, and maybe this is what the EU is seeking to do. They are seeking to destabilise communities that have flourished for thousands of years in harmony, and to destabilise these communities, have their employment, livelihoods vanquished, and their place of abode threatened.

Mass unfettered migration is an EU weapon delivered quickly, utilised as a technique to eviscerate nation states, to harm social structures and local culture, to kill off the family unit, to effectively intensify the state of war internally and globally.

Under Tony Blair’s premiership the doors were opened wide, and David Cameron, despite false promises opened the doors even wider.

Merkel today blames the British people for instability in the Continent, however it is her mass migration policy which is causing instability.

Controlled migration is the antithesis to what we have now. Within nation states, an orderly controlled form of migration is a good thing. We want to encourage skilled people into the UK who have something to contribute, and a slow controlled migratory policy is a sensible economic policy. This can only be achieved by leaving the EU.

If the levels and speed of migration continue at this pace into the UK, there will be social unrest leading to certain civil war. Maybe this is what the EU wants. After all, the EU, which is led by Germany lost two wars against Britain, and this is one way of destroying their nemesis once and for all.

If the UK remains within the EU after the referendum, there will be a mass exodus of people away from the country of their birth. The brain drain will certainly affect industry and institutions because the unskilled will not be able to replace these people.

Eventually within two or three years, there will be unrest in the streets. Mass looting and violence will spread like wildfire across the country, and the UK would see civil war erupting as the clash of cultures fight it out. Britain will have been emasculated by remaining in the EU but there will be fighting in the streets to try to regain some semblance of normality.

In the chaos, no shops will be open, and the electricity and water may be disrupted in most cities across the UK. When people are desperate for food, thirsty, without hope, they do things they never thought they could do. On a tiny island like Britain, we could see carnage, and gangs marauding, looking for spoils as the army and police are on standby.

The augurs do not bode well if Britain remains within a totalitarian undemocratic regime such as the EU, especially within a state that is willing to sacrifice its own people for their evil utopian super state dream.

KAjwhriuw024hvjbed2SORH