Member of Parliament reveals that the Britain is sinking into the neo-fascist abyss of European Union

Recently signed Lisbon Treaty is an outrageous power-grab

by Ashley Mote, British Member of Parliament, [Editorially adapted for publication]

	British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

A strong federalist government cannot be established until it alone, and not the individual states which comprise it, has its hands on all major administrative functions and the sole power to wage war...

So said the German political philosopher Max Weber in the early 20th century. It was a withering anticipation of events which were to unfold over the next few decades. Weber argued that, when an individual state in a federation could no longer raise enough revenue to maintain its own armies, and had to depend on the federal government for money, then that state had lost in reality any sovereignty it might still maintain as a fiction.

While both the timing and source of Max Weber’s comments might be regarded as singularly ill-fated, in fact he was merely echoing tactics that can be traced as far back as Solomon.

King Solomon divided Palestine into 12 taxable units, deliberately cutting across tribal lines to weaken their influence and coherence. By imposing heavy taxation and enforced labour he effectively compelled people to move about in large numbers, which in turn diluted family units and parental authority. Within one generation the demographic map of Palestine had changed beyond recovery.

Recognise anything?

By far the most dangerous part of the new European Union (EU) constitution, signed in Lisbon last December, is the retention of the clause that gives the EU the permanent right to seize more powers without any future agreements. It was in the last one - it is in this one. Only tyrants do that. It is an outrageous, contemptible power-grab.

In any case, under UK law such blatantly undemocratic powers must be illegal since any British parliament is specifically forbidden from binding its successors.

In a nutshell, the Lisbon treaty turns the member states from theoretical masters of the house of Brussels into its servants. It makes law, instead of creating a framework for law-making. It offers no effective checks and balances to control future law-makers. It consolidates power for a system of government by a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. It puts that elite group above the law to be imposed on everyone else. Nothing has changed.

Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, said the original version should change no more than its name. That is exactly what happened, and it was done solely to minimise trouble in the UK. Swedish commissioner Margot Wallstrom, responsible for ‘communications’, admitted as much to me in a public meeting of the European Parliament’s Constitutional Affairs committee earlier last year.

Did Gordon Brown know what he was signing? Had he read, and did he agree it all?

Did any of the other 26 prime ministers and presidents know what they were signing?

We can be sure they did not.

The text is not only unreadable. It is impenetrable. And that has to be deliberate.

Such is the EU’s arrogance and contempt for the people it claims to govern, it has chosen to ignore the Vienna convention on the law of treaties. This requires that all international treaties be written "in good faith" according to the "ordinary meaning” of words.

But not this one. The Lisbon treaty has less pages than the original EU constitution rejected by the French and Dutch, but contains more words: 76,250 compared to 67,850. Yet those extra 8500 words have been squeezed into a document with 62 fewer pages – 294 instead of 356.

Nonetheless, the 17 existing treaties which currently make up the legal basis of the EU are all amended and consolidated in one way or other. Many of the changes are profound and crucially important, at least if the EU is to abide by the law.

Not that there is much evidence of that.

When Austria was president of the European Council in June 2006, Hans Winkler told the European Parliament's Constitutional Affairs committee that the EU would revert to the existing treaties to proceed with 36 projects and institutions which had previously depended on the failed constitution for their legality.

He added that "the substance of the proposed constitution is not in question. Its contents and principles stand."

The same now applies to the Lisbon treaty, it seems.

The European Commission recognises the need to minimise coherent public criticism of the Lisbon treaty, especially before it is ratified and especially in the UK. So, to distract attention from what is now being implemented, and to make lucid evaluation as near impossible as makes no difference, the European Commission has come up with another cunning wheeze.

The bureaucrats were ordered to make understanding the Lisbon treaty as complicated as possible. So they invented three new and different systems of numbering the contents. First, they changed all the numbers in the rejected original constitution. None of the numbers used then appeared in the same place in the draft agreed (but not signed) in Lisbon in October 2007.

After October they then invented yet another new system of numbers. The bureaucrats also refused to provide a table of cross-references to allow comparisons. Finally they inserted a completely new numbering system for all articles in the final version signed in Lisbon in December 2007.

The contents can be compared with the original constitution only by preparing your own table of comparisons. No official service within the EU or the commission will help. Worse still, if worse were possible, the intergovernmental conference in October 2007 decided that no institution should be allowed to publish a consolidated version before the treaty had been finally ratified by all 27 member states.

In other words, the so-called ‘citizens’ of the EU have been deliberately prevented from seeing and understanding for themselves exactly what impact the Lisbon treaty will have on their lives.

Even lawyers expert in such analysis will take weeks of intense research to figure it all out.

The opaqueness of the EU is already the stuff of legend.

If the Lisbon treaty were such a good thing, why try to obscure its contents in this way? The truth is much simpler. The Lisbon treaty is an outrage, and must be opposed tooth and nail.

Become a Member:

Would you like to see other similar articles and critical commentaries in The Canadian National Newspaper? Then, show your support. Make a member-pledge donation, in support of the Membership Drive of the Pro-Democracy Media Foundation.

The Canadian can only continue to publish investigative articles in such areas, with the donations from members of the public in Canada, the U.S., and abroad. Consider making a donation of $50.00, $75.00, $100.00, $200.00 or more. Donors are eligible to receive our first collector's print edition in mail. Alternatively, you can send us a note to be placed on our special email list of members. Member-donors can also suggest articles or commentaries to be published in The Canadian.

The Canadian is a socially progressive and not-for-profit national newspaper, with an international readership. We provide an alternative to the for-profit commercial focused media, which often censors vital information and perspective of potential interest to the diverse Canadian public, and other peoples internationally.

Become a member of The Canadian, with your donation-pledge. Help support independent, progressive, and not-for-profit journalism.