Conservatives for Corruption

If you cannot find the name of your Conservative MEP in this list below, then he/she most certainly does not deserve your vote on 10th June - as they are clearly unconcerned at the level of corruption within the EU, not having voted for the motion of censure against the EU Commission taken in the European Parliament today.

Tories who stood up FOR the motion of Censure and against EU Corruption:-

Callanan, Goodwill, Hannan, Heaton-Harris, Helmer, Nicholson, Sacrédeus, Scallon, Schleicher, Stauner, Villiers

The above, not all of whom are Conservatives were the members of the EPP voting for the motion of censure.

If you wish to find whether your Conservative MEP actually voted against the motion you will find their name among the much longer list of European Peoples Party members, with whom Michael Howard has committed his party to stay grouped, from this link Click on Roll Call of Votes 2004-05-04 and look for the name under the 'Against' list for PPE-DE.

A lengthy and shameful list indeed, hence our reason for not reproducing it here, but amply illustrating the ultra-federalist and subservient nature of the group to which Howard has further pledged his party. Quite disgraceful for a man once prepared to masquerade as a Eurosceptic.

Censure Motion

A motion of censure is taking place at this moment in the European Parliament, against the European Commission, over the negligent and incompetent handling of the corruption within the EU's Statistics branch.

Incredibly, the British Conservative party's MEPs were ordered to withdraw their signatures from the Censure Motion by the German Christian Democrat boss of the EPP group to which they are committed to belong even after the next elections.

The Tories Euro Election material issued today - 'Five Reasons to vote Conservative at the European Elections on 10th June' is already looking completely absurd, as reason number two states: 'Tony Blair is refusing to let the people decide in a referendum' on the Constitution.

It is now also appearing completely hypocritical over its reason five - 'Fighting Fraud and Waste in the EU".

We shall see how the Conservative MEPs vote!

Howard's Horrific Poll Results

The horrendous state of two party politics in Britain is witnessed today by the latest YouGov poll published in the Daily Telegraph view from here, (click on image to enlarge).

While the 'Torygraph' blurb accompanying the results tries to make much of Michael Howard having overtaken the beleaguered Prime Minister, a quick look at the results shows that the facts are that Blair has really just fallen to the deeply unpopular rating figures of 29 per cent approval on which Howard himself has been stuck for some time.

This is a disaster for the Conservatives, probably made no better by having been consistently forecast on this blog for many months!

The Conservative Party European Election Manifesto

The document may be read from the link below, which takes you to a pdf file.

Tory Euro Manifesto

The summary from the party web site is linked from here for those not wishing to download the whole slick document which, in my view and simply put may be summarised as follows:-

Vote Conservative and you will be stuck in the sick, corrupt and rotten EU for as far ahead as it is possible to see, you will probably be impoverished but with the new taxpayer sourced political party funding coming into force after the elections we top Tories will all be rich as Croesus"

Howard's Past Again Returns to Haunt the Tories

A party seriously intent on regaining office should have seriously considered the known track record of any individual chosen to ruthlessly oust an as yet untested but democratically elected leader. Not the Conservatives, however! Ignoring the obvious fact that Howard was probably the least popular minister of a generally detested cabinet in the final John Major administration, they nevertheless - disregarding the strongly put and oft repeated urgings of this blog, blindly thrust him to lead their party towards yet further ignominy.

How Labour must have relished the cold-blooded coup, as witnessed by congratulations for the Conservative's far-sightedness by the likes of Polly Toynbee and the brainwashed media minions of the BBC.

Yesterday bore witness to just how grave a misjudgement this truly was, for following a reported first rate crushing of Blair in the Commons on his superficiality over his immigration speech - Labour were able to let it be known that as one of Howard's last acts as Home Secretary he had planned to slash the number of immigration officers by 1200 posts.

The Tories were left looking completely absurd, claiming that protocol had been breached, but having now lost one of their main elements of attack against the government. How much more convincing would IDS now be able to appear!

This article from the New Zealand Herald provides the source and is linked from here, I quote:-

"In a breach of long-established protocols, Mr Blair took the unusual step of disclosing that when Labour came to power, they discovered that Mr Howard, as Home Secretary, had been planning to cut the number of immigration posts by 1,200."

Backdoor Withdrawal?

An interesting analysis from a mainly eastern european perspective of the likely effects of Blair's Referendum somersault has been published by Radio Free Europe, linked here.

Co-incidentally it gives an interesting insight into the workings of the mind of the Conservative Party's Group Leader in Europe :-

Hans-Gert Poettering, the chairman of the conservative European People's Party group in the European Parliament, demanded on 20 April that a provision be added to the draft constitution stipulating that member states that vote against the constitution must leave the union.

Is this also Conservative Party policy yet I wonder? And, how long, must we wait before the Conservative Party falls into line with orders issued by Poettering? Two to three weeks, I would guess, if the Tory capitulation precedent set in the Eurostat censure motion signature matter is to be any guide!

And the Next Loser will Be......Malcolm Rifkind????

They are at it again, as blogged here during February the party that seemingly loves to lose, having ousted an honest man as leader for one of the least trusted politicians in recent history, (who cannot even raise his honesty perception levels in the opinion polls above those of Tony Blair who nearly every columnist in almost all the Sunday press seemed absolutely determined to now label a liar), is once again being tipped to be replaced by another ex-minister with the aura of a charlatan as for ever tainted by his years as a senior minister in the Major administration. Unbelievably, its that smooth talking, slippery-looking and word weaving Scot, recently announced as being soon to be transplanted to Kensington and Chelsea.

The theorist today is Michael Brown in 'The Independent' in an article titled The Tories in 2010: 'I'd put a fiver each way on Malcolm Rifkind' which is linked from here.

Not keen on this commentators selection....well consider his alternatives:-

It is possible, however, that the next Tory leader is not currently in Parliament. This is where my money goes - on Sir Malcolm. But if we are really into modern, fully paid-up whizz-kids, then watch out for Adam Afriyie, the black candidate for Windsor, Nicholas Boles, the gay candidate for Hove, Ed Vaizey, speech writer for Michael Howard, and Esther McVey, the daytime television presenter, who will be fast-tracked for promotion as soon as they are elected

The 1975 Referendum

Debate is now certain to become dominated by aspects of the eventual referendum on the EU Constitution announced by Blair last week. Already we have encountered misconceptions and conflicting versions of what took place, and therefore reproduce below a brief summary with some relevant links which follow immediately afterwards. Those wishing to view, download or print (11 pages) the Pamphlet that was distributed to every household may do so from from here.

Quote

In 1975 a referendum was held in the United Kingdom, asking whether the electorate wished to remain part of what was then the Common Market. It is a common misconception that this referendum was on whether Britain should join - this is not the case, as Britain was already a member.

The referendum was a manifesto commitment of the Labour party under the leadership of Harold Wilson. The Labour party was elected to form Her Majesty's Government and duly held the referendum.

The main purpose of this site is to host an online version of the pamphlet distributed to every household by the Government in support of the Government's recommendation that people should vote in favour of staying in. The aim is to provide proof of what the British people were told about membership of the Common Market on the occasion they were last consulted. It demonstrates just how far the European Union has 'progressed' as a political project since then.

Please use this link to see the pamphlet text. Scans of the original document should be available soon.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The question that was actually asked was:
DO YOU THINK THE UNITED KINGDOM SHOULD STAY IN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY (THE COMMON MARKET)?

The result was that 67.5 % of votes were in favour of staying in.

The House of Commons had voted (9 April 1975) on staying in on the new terms:
396 in favour (70.0%), 170 against (30.0%).

Earlier polls had asked:
"If you could vote tomorrow on whether we should stay in the Common Market or leave it, how would you vote?"
Average results: 33% stay, 41% leave, 26% don't know.

In Feb 1975 the question was altered to:
"If the Government negotiated new terms for Britain's membership of the Common Market and thought it was in Britain's interest to remain, how would you vote - to stay or to leave?"
Results: 53% to stay, 22% to leave, 25% don't know.

The above information is apparently available in:
"The 1975 Referendum" by David Butler and Uwe Kitzinger. ISBN 0-333 662990-3
Unquote

Links are from the first page of the pamphlet site click here to access.

Why the Tories are Wrong!

The people of Britain are fed up with the EU even without a Constitution. Labour and the EU will force the issue to be "In or Out". Fighting the campaign against the constitution because that seems easier could thus backfire - it should be fought from the start on gut feelings -IT IS THAT BIG AN ISSUE!.

Less than a quarter of Britons think the EU is a good thing, the battle is there to be won, but it needs to be led by principled, straightforward people with clarity of thought and reasonable foresight. That seems to rule out the entire opposition front bench!

Countries work because all know they are in them together and therefore mostly strive for the common good and enrichment of all. In the EU everybody has been in it for what they can take out- for a good example of that just look at the present commission today: French and Spanish Commissioners already off for home politics, Patten and Kinnock returning enriched to comfortable posts while Romano Prodi the Commission President blatantly sacrifices EU diplomacy in his bid to be the next Italian PM.

Meantime national politicians scramble for advantage and sell out their country's sovereignty and democracy so that they may be next to take their turns at the trough. Today's press astoundingly reports that the Tories are even trying to get the NO campaign concentrating on a new Treaty for Britain's everlasting EU incorporation - and the sidelining of EU-withdrawalists. Power mad and greed driven, their motives are too clear for their arguments to ever be believed!

Do they think nobody has rumbled them yet? Where are the principled resignations from the supposed Eurosceptics?

How many Conservative MEP signatures actually remained on the motion of censure against the Commission - we will find out and the names, if any will be emblazoned in pride upon this blog.

The alternative of a list of shame would prove too long!

Tory Embarassment as New Press Baron Supporters dubs Germans as Nazis

The Daily Telegraph seems to take some delight in spreading this story all over its front page. After hailing the backing of the Express papers yesterday, this was probably the last thing the party needs, especially given its recent obvious subservience to the German dominated ultra-federalist European Peoples Party within the European Parliament! The article may be read from here

Ancram in The Guardian

The Shadow Foreign Secretary apes his leader in claiming Conservative credit for forcing Blair's U-turn on an EU referendum. The article "If the British people vote no, Europe will thank them"is linked from here.

The essence of the Conservative Contradiction and Conundrum is neatly encapsulated in the final paragraph:-

Conservatives want Europe's member states to have room to breathe. If some countries want to integrate more closely then that is fine - as long as they do not force countries who do not want to to follow them. Our Europe policy is simple: live and let live, flourish and let flourish. That is a modern and mature approach - one that will allow Europe to succeed in the 21st century.

The countries driving the EU project forward and the open federalists who support them do not wish the EU to develop in that way. What they want is what is encapsulated in the Constitution document proposed by Giscard's Convention. The secretive conspirators who are the real forces behind this developing nightmare apparently want something even more federalist and less democratic than that awful concoction. The British Conservatives increasingly appear to be resuming their earlier role as the witless tools of one or both of these two, not necessarily distinct groups.

Howard/Blair Letter Exchange after PMQ

Unusually this link to The Times is available online, so we provide it herewith:-

Howard's pledge on European constitution

The question this exchange leaves unanswered for me, and about which no doubt Labour will return........is this - If the British rejected the Constitution with Howard as PM, what would he then do with regard to the existing EU Treaties? Blair's position is confused but clear - to me Michael Howard's is simply confused!

The Telegraph's Tease

The leading article in today's Daily Telegraph ends with this teasing statement:-

Mr Blair will now try to persuade us that in this referendum we are really being asked to decide whether we still want to "belong to Europe". That is a debate he is confident of winning, in the process shattering Tory unity. Mr Howard must not only expose this fraud, but also bring the debate back to where it belongs: the European constitution.

I must ask - "Just how," please explain " is such a feat to be achieved?"

No doubt it is what the editorial staff of the oft dubbed 'Torygraph' and the combined eurofederalist forces of the "Howard Conservatives" would wish was going to be the case - but it ain't going to happen.

I have read reports, articles and comments from Sydney to San Franciso to Shanghai to Stavanger and all are agreed the question will be Britain's continuation within the European Union. How could the argument be restricted to the Constitution, voters will know they will be unlikely to ever get another vote - this time it is the EU until it disintegrates or OUT.

The Conservatives, who already risk being dubbed - devious, duplicitous, disingenuous, double-dealing etc., etc. over their dealings on the EU question during the last half century, now risk making themselves look stupid and absurd to boot.

They cannot avoid splitting on this issue in my opinion. Not unless the so-called Tory euro-sceptics truly lack the courage of their stated beliefs, that is! They can split openly and voluntarily now at the opening of hostilities or they can wait for the strains to pull them apart.

As a voter who would like to have a free-market, low tax, pro-individualistic party to return to when Britain has finally regained its sovereignty I had rather hoped they would pick the former course, (which would offer better scope for an eventual party re-launch. The past twenty four hours, however, has not been encouraging!

Jens-Peter Bonde on the Censure

This link will take you to the item on the Censure Motion of the EU Commission in the Eurostat corruption affair. This is a quote:-

My group cannot approve EU's accounts for 2002, the year where the chief accountant, Marta Andreasen was suspended. The reputable accounting firm, Deloitte, has estimated the annual fraud for 1997 to be 7 billion euros. Since then there have been fewer cases, but the amounts involved have been larger. The numbers may even be much worse, but we cannot tell: no control authority has had a full overview.

The Court of Auditors cannot obtain all documents.
The mediator does not have the right to see all documents.
The budgetary control committee in the EU Parliament is only superficially informed.

Through 25 years I have, as member of the EU Parliament, asked for basic information on the use of EU funds. I have never had any serious answers on, for instance, the distribution of agricultural subsidies or on the number of working groups and their participants. There is only one language that the leading architects in the Commission will understand: if we refuse to approve the accounts Prodi and his colleagues will have the opportunity to rule their own house. Today they are prisoners of weak practices. Free them, reject the accounts and place the political responsibility.

The debate on the censure motion will take place tonight from 9:00 pm although the vote will be deferred until early May when the voting procedures will be unclear following enlargement.
Another seemingly unaccountable arrangement?

Motion of Censure on Commission

Britain's Tories are about to be shamed as rarely before! The following is a Press Release from the European Parliament:-

Quote
Motion of censure
President Pat COX announced at midday that he had received a motion of censure against the Commission, signed by 65 MEPs. This meets the requirements of article 34 of the rules of procedure and the motion will be passed on to the Commission. In conformity with the rules, the President announced that the debate on this motion would be held at 9pm on Wednesday, with the vote to take place during the May sitting.

In a brief exchange of views, PES group leader Enrique BARÓN CRESPO (E) raised the question of the legal basis for this motion, given that Parliament will be voting in its newly enlarged make-up after 1st May. EPP-ED group leader Hans-Gert POETTERING (, D) indicated that despite his group's criticisms of the Commission over the Eurostat affair, the group was not supporting this motion of censure. Jens-Peter BONDE (EDD, DK), who had led calls for the censure motion, said the signatories of the motion were not seeking anyone's head on a plate: they simply wanted the Commission to take political responsibility for the Eurostat scandal, and this was the only way provided in the treaty for this to happen. For the Greens/EFA, Daniel COHN-BENDIT (F) also raised the issue of the number of signatures required and the necessary majority to adopt the motion given the impending enlargement of the EU. He called on those members of his group who had signed the motion to withdraw their signatures.

Mogens CAMRE (UEN, DK) raised a procedural point, asking why two signatures of his colleagues had not been validated, as he had personally been present when the individuals concerned had signed the document. President Cox explained that the verification required had not been received from the two individuals. While they were not presently on the list of validated signatories, there were in any case sufficient signatures for the motion to be debated and put to the vote.

The motion of censure is likely to be the first vote of Parliament's May sitting.
Unquote

It may be found on this link

Blair Wipes the floor with Howard on Referendum U-turn Statement

If ever there was an occasion when the Leader of the Conservative Opposition should have had the Prime Minister on the ropes, it must have been today as the Government faced its biggest ever climb down.

The tragedy of the Tories recent treachery could be seen in all its squalor and depth today, as Howard's response was savaged by Blair, particularly reminding the House of Howard's record on voting against a referendum on Maastricht among other carefully aimed barbs.

The first thing those against Britain's absorbtion into Europe now need to do is distance themselves from the Conservative Party or they will have their own campaign besmirched by their long history of treachery.

Barefaced Bullshit Begins

Writing in the Evening Standard last night, the leader of the opposition, who reports now circulating indicate required considerable persuasion from colleagues to endorse the idea of supporting a constitutional referendum at all, had the absolute gall to put his name to the following statement:-

"Politicians should never forget that they govern on behalf of the people. Individual parliaments, and the politicians elected to serve in them, do not own Britain's liberties. They are there to safeguard them. And they should not diminish those liberties without an explicit mandate from the British people."

Does Michael Howard not realise, that if the British people are not yet aware that that is exacrtly what he - as a long serving government minister - and the party which he leads have been doing for years.....then they soon will?!! And that all the facts are now almost certain to be revealed!

Does Michael Howard so quickly forget that even up to today he has chosen to remain in coalition with the European Peoples Party in the next European Parliament - a group that strongly supports the entire constitution.... which indeed believes it is insufficiently federalist?

Does Michael Howard believe that the people of Britain are completely stupid?

The answer to all those questions is YES, and if Howard believes that is good news for the Tories then he is not as clever as people assert. There is only one honourable course for Howard and that is resignation. There is probably no course for survival for the Conservatives and that seems justly deserved.

Let's face it, there is one group of politicians in Britain where more of such despicable dissemblers and thieves of democracy described in the paragraph written by Howard above and quoted in bold print, may be found more than anywhere else, and that is within the Conservative Party.

Howard Attacks Red Tape and Misses the Target

Just out from The Financial Times comes this report of an attack by the Leader of the Opposition on the fearful increase in regulations that serve to throttle the UK economy.

While the government of Tony Blair, singled out as the culprit is certainly partly to blame the real villain of the ever growing trend lies elsewhere and it is one supported by Howard's Conservative Party: namely the European Union.

The article may be read in full from here. It close with the following paragraph, symptomatic of the Conservatives confused viewpoint:-

Since Mr Howard became leader in the autumn, several big business figures who had abandoned the party under Iain Duncan Smith have returned to the fold.

Large corporations managed by the same type of bureaucratic individual that runs the entire EU project tend to favour the protection granted to their established market positions. It is the small business entrepreneur who truly provides the power to any economy that usually suffers from excess red tape.

Conservative Corruption Condonement and Confusion finally gets some Coverage

A good two weeks later than when the story first broke the chaos in the ranks of the Conservative Party in Brussels finally gets a mention in the Christopher Booker column, which supposedly prides itself on being at the forefront of eu-sceptical news. The item is linked from here and concludes with this paragraph:-

But as a measure of the mess the Tories get into when they try to play weasel games over Europe, thus showing contempt for the views of most of their grass-roots membership, this shabby episode deserves more publicity than it has received.

Hear, hear....we have been doing our best on all our blogs and internet fora for the past couple of weeks....where was the Booker Column?

Tories Tremble at the thought that TV Unknown could signal Howard's End

The lack of movement in the opinion polls must really be beginning to worry the Tory Top Brass.

A report about a new ITV popular show to select an independent unknown contestent to run in the next election has them all of a dither that the winner might decide to challenge their new, but very shop-soiled and care-worn looking leader. The article may be read in full from here, but these quotes give the flavour:-

Senior figures within the Conservative Party are understood to be deeply concerned that the winner would stand against their leader, Michael Howard, because his 5,907 majority in Folkestone and Hythe is significantly smaller to that of either Tony Blair or Charles Kennedy.

Their fears have been echoed by Sir Bernard Ingham, Lady Thatcher's former spokesman, who said it was not difficult to work out where the winner would stand "if they wanted maximum drama". He dismissed the show as "cheap entertainment" and "a disgrace" and called on the Electoral Commission to stop it going ahead.

Amazing what little faith the apparently conscienceless conservatives have in the new man they so ruthlessly replaced IDS with just a few months ago. One would have thought the acquired aura of power and all the attendant publicity would have been sufficient in itself to ensure that the new Number 1 would at least comfortably win in his own constituency; but all that was presumably before the polls reminded this bunch of nincompoops that any senior minister from the Major years was doomed to perpetual unpopularity with the broader electorate.

Maybe if they next pick Rifkind as leader, he will at least fend off any unknown TV challenger to retain his own seat. After all Kensington and Chelsea must surely be virtually impregnable?