Relatively speaking, the 2005 referenda ‘No’ votes of France and The Netherlands on the EU Constitution have proved to be as mosquito bites to a dinosaur. As the Treaty of Lisbon, which legally replicates the Constitutional Treaty, is railroaded through, it is clear the insects have been swatted away.
Just as some of the European politicians are incautious when bruiting the greatness and cleverness of their achievement in reviving the corpse of the Constitution, so others amongst them from time to time reveal their utter terror of the people of Europe and the remote possibility that any one of the member nations of the EU might suddenly turn around and actually consult their voters about the Treaty.
Thus today Slovenia, which takes up the EU's rotating presidency on New Year’s Day, blurts out a set of truths which lay bare some of those terrors. According to The Daily Telegraph,
[Slovenia’s Prime Minister Janez] Jansa said that after French and Dutch voters rejected the constitution in 2005, Europe's elites were using the parliamentary route rather than risky popular votes to ratify the accord.
EU officials and national governments have drawn up documents "mapping" the political obstacles ahead, Mr Jansa revealed.
To help Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, get the new Treaty through Parliament, Brussels will delay proposals to scrap Britain's annual £3 billion rebate.
The process of bringing the EU Constitution, now in the form of the Treaty of Lisbon, into force, regardless of the wishes of the peoples of Europe, has been one which has entailed considerable but highly secret planning. It is a reasonable inference that the British Foreign Office has lent its skills of deviousness and mendacity to this process and that the British government has played a full part in the subversion of democracy that this process entails: an inference borne out indisputably by the lengths to which Gordon Brown has gone, even to the extent of damaging his own Government and the Labour Party, in order to play his part in getting the Constitution into force across the European Union.
That the process involves the British Foreign Office in dishonesty, deviousness and dishonour is emphatically encapsulated in the apparent scheme whereby Brussels will delay proposals to scrap Britain’s annual £3 billion rebate. This was the amount of money that Mr. Blair meekly yielded to the EU Bully Boys who demanded that changes be made to the sums which the UK recovers from its contributions, a rebate won against the fierce opposition of the EU in the 1980s by Margaret Thatcher. The plan is to delay implementation of that craven surrender beyond the UK’s ratification process so that it can in no way be used to inflame opinion against the EU in general and the Treaty in particular.
However, Mr. Jansa fears
“We cannot exclude the possibility that something will go wrong.”
Such as, for example, a democratic decision being taken which “derails” the whole process. Any decision to vote against this Constitution will be met with the sternest resistance by the Euro Nabobery who have carefully planned the process so that the risk such a “possibility” actually happening is minimised to almost nothing.
Does it not tell us all that we need to know of the EU that its political elite actively and secretly conspires to prevent any of its citizens voicing an opinion contrary to its plans? That the Euro Nabobery is confident of the success of its plot is evidenced by the continuing implementation of a part of the Treaty for which there is, as yet, no lawful basis. The Telegraph writes that:
Slovenia is planning to create the basis for a [EU] diplomatic service to be run by the [EU] “foreign minister” as well as an office for the new President of Europe, raising fears that parts of the new treaty are already being implemented despite the fact it has not been ratified.
This is just one feature of the EU Constitution which many who oppose the EU use as an example of how the EU will acquire all the characteristics of a Sovereign Independent State in its own right in 2009; this and the legal capacity of the EU Foreign Minister to sign Treaties on behalf of the EU as a legal entity. No wonder, then, that there is sensitivity about plans which would seem to be a major case of putting the cart before the horse.
All will ask themselves: why and how do the Eurocrats feel such confidence? Might it be that the nature of their conspiracy against their own people, against democracy itself, is so well-planned and so deep-rooted in their hearts that they believe it to be all over bar the shouting? Which, as always, brings us back to that old chestnut: why, if the European Union Constitution is such a bright shining thing, a construct which will bring palpable and obvious benefits to all its citizens, is the political elite so afraid of asking our opinion on the matter?
Or is it that they have excised utterly the words ‘NO’ and ‘democracy’ from the EU dictionary?
Finally, I leave you with these little gems from one of the earliest of the Euro Nabobery, Charles de Gaulle, who knew a thing or two about when and when not to ask the people for their views, though with his last referendum, a footling thing too, he came a cropper:
* Yes, it is Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, it is Europe, it is the whole of Europe, that will decide the fate of the world. (23 November 1959, Strasbourg)
* When I want to know what France thinks, I ask myself.
That just about sums it all up, does it not?