You are less powerful if you pool sovereignty

According to supporters of the EU if I pooled my decision making with my neighbours I will be more powerful. Let me show you what nonsense this is.

Let us suppose I joined with 27 of my neighbours to be more powerful. It is true that by combining we would have considerably more income and spending power than I have on my own. If we agreed what we wanted to buy we might qualify for a better discount. The problem is to get the benefit of combined buying I would no longer have a veto on what we bought. I might lose the vote to buy beef for dinner and have to accept the common view of pork. I might want a UK made Honda but have to accept a German made VW to get the benefits of bulk buying.

It would also not be long before the neighbours had a vote on sharing. Anyone with a larger income could be outvoted by those on lower incomes, leading to the few richer neighbours having to pay more in but getting less back. It would be in my interest to earn less than the average to improve my take from the club.

My neighbours might want to extend this to voting. In a low turnout local election 28 votes might matter and would clearly have much more impact than my one vote. To use the power I would have to accept going along with the majority view of 28 and all casting our votes for the same party, even if it was one I did not like.

If a big local planning issue came up 28 people saying the same thing might have more influence than just 1. Again the problem is my view on the plans might be the minority one which got suppressed by the rules of the neighbours club.

Far from being more powerful my neighbours club would soon become a huge nuisance, getting in the way of me spending my money, using my vote and expressing my view as I see fit.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

106 Comments

  1. The Active Citizen
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 5:57 am | Permalink

    Great illustrations JR. Let’s take them further.

    After a while, one of my neighbours decides that her house maintenance is getting neglected ahd her children don’t want to do it. Instead of asking some neighbours on the southern end of town if they have sons or daughters who might want to do the job, she suddenly invites a group of young men from other countries.

    She should of course have asked us all first, as we’ve pooled our sovereignty and we have rules about who can be invited into our village from outside. However she’s the richest woman in the village and a large number of my neighbours benefit from her largesse, so they decide not to complain. I’m outvoted.

    The young men set up tents in my neighbour’s garden, until they get so numerous that she starts thinking this is not such a good idea after all. At the next neighbourhood meeting she insists that we should all buy some tents and accept some of these foreign young men who just keep on coming.

    One day my son comes home telling me that his job contract won’t be renewed. It seems that he’s being replaced by one of the new young men.

    The next month my wife finally goes into labour. We rush off to the local hospital, where we find that there’s a queue. The maternity ward is full, because apparently many of the young men have taken wives (several in some case – something I didn’t think was legal but it seems that there are new human rights laws for the newcomers) and the doctor asks if we’ve considered home birth?

    I employ a negotiator, to start demanding changes to this whole sovereignty sharing deal. Some months later he comes back and tells me that he’s secured fundamental changes. I now have complete control – provided I can persuade the majority of my neighbours to agree with what’s in my interests. He explains that my views are nonetheless ‘sovereign’.

    I still have to pay for membership of the village club (and the dues seem to keep rising each year) but all the neighbours and the negotiator tell me that I couldn’t possibly survive on my own. Like I used to, quite happily.

    I was definitely going to try to leave the club but then the negotiator patiently explained that if I did, my house was likely to burn down, in the middle of a mass flood, and that a North Korean missile might land in the garden any day. Apparently all of this could be avoided by staying in the club and enjoying the safety and security afforded by a feeling of togetherness.

    [Coming to a village near you soon…]

    • Anonymous
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:14 am | Permalink

      Apparently it’s OK for the IN lobby to invoke the immigration argument “Leaving Europe will lead to migrant camps in Kent.”

      • Douglas Carter
        Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:55 am | Permalink

        …’David Cameron is to warn that a Brexit would leave Britain vulnerable to terror attacks and that migrant camps will spring up across the South East of England.’…

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12145781/David-Cameron-warns-of-migrant-camps-in-southern-England-if-Brexit-vote.html

        I don’t actually have a problem with this story.

        Because the subtext says:-

        ….'[David Cameron] I confirm out loud and in plain, recordable English language that a Government under my custodianship will be insufficiently competent to protect UK borders, protect UK Counties from squalor-ridden ghettos rising in the suburbs and will be unwilling to provide the necessary support to the Courts, to the Armed Forces and Security Services to ensure they can prosecute and remove unwanted individuals from the UK. I also confirm that is solely the fault of my Government alone, and that no blame can be attached to the European Union in the matters at hand. As your Prime Minister, I confirm I will do nothing whatsoever which might be effective in countering these problems, and that I am happy to leave these long-term Government failures in the hands of the luckless British Taxpayer. Please remember to vote Conservative at the next General Election’.

        • Hope
          Posted February 9, 2016 at 6:52 pm | Permalink

          Do not forget where 9/11 was planned, Hamburg was it not? Merkel unilaterally asking all migrants to Germany without proper vetting, against EU law. Paris attacks, Cologne attacks, attacks in Sweden,Finland and across EU countries. Eurozone is useless as we saw with all the attacks which they failed to prevent. Europole don’t shar intelligence with NON EU countries, as UK does. However, We are being told we are safer in the EU!

      • alan jutson
        Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:53 am | Permalink

        We will only get those from the Jungle in Calais, if our Border control is inadequate and unfit for purpose.

        Someone should tell the PM that it is his responsibility to control our Countries Borders.
        He cannot blame anyone else, as we will not be under any EU rules any more.

        CO-operation agreements can still agreed !!!

        International agreements !!!!

        So bloody simple to argue against this silly scare mongering.

        The BSE lot are running out of sensible argument, idea’s, facts, and and comment it would seem, hence they make up this nonsense.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:37 am | Permalink

      John and Active Citizen, can I suggest you both apply to write the next episode of Yes Minister. You are both brilliant and your posts today were a joy to read. So much better than the political twaddle we have to listen to from others and better at getting the message across.

    • The Active Citizen
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:57 am | Permalink

      In July last year, JR led a debate in Westminster Hall on “UK’s relations with the Euro area and further Euro integration”. As it didn’t take place in the main chamber of the HoC, many people might not have seen this.

      Our host’s speech is very relevant to the question of sovereignty, and includes his now-famous phrase “a wild ride to political union”.

      The debate came following the publication the previous month of the EU’s “5 Presidents’ Report”, something which is essential reading if a little dull for most. Fortunately in his speech JR gives a more easily-digestible summary of what this report means to us all.

      I raise this now because we’re starting to hear pro-EU campaigners telling the public that there’s no EU plan to create a United States of Europe. Totally untrue. There are innumerable speeches and writings over decades from prominent EU political leaders and bureaucrats making this perfectly clear.

      Those readers who are interested can view JR’s debate here. JR’s opening speech starts just after 16.29pm.

      Our host’s closing remarks included the following important plea: “…we should share that fact with the British public, which is what I am trying to do in my modest way today. We must say that there is a big plot afoot – a wild ride to political union – that is not something to which the UK can sign up. We should not get in their way, but the price of our happy consent to their new arrangements must be a new set of arrangements for us to get back powers that insulate us from all this.”

      Surprising that in his negotiations the PM forgot to use our significant bargaining chip of saying we might be amenable to further Eurozone integration, provided the EU gives us everything we want.

    • Ken Moore
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

      Active Citizen ‘ I now have complete control – provided I can persuade the majority of my neighbours to agree with what’s in my interests’

      We already have a Yellow card scheme…
      And the Orange card scheme….

      (links removed as they did not work ed)

      Now we are expected to believe that a ‘red card scheme’ is going to make a jot of difference!. I sincerely hope the supreme arrogance of Mr Cameron will be his downfall. He treats the paying public with utter contempt.

    • Tim L
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 6:45 pm | Permalink

      …and wouldn’t it be generius of working residents to leave there homes unlocked. This has two benefits; the tented residents get to use the property during the day and the home owner gets added security and no longer needs alarms and locks.

  2. Dame Rita Webb
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 6:32 am | Permalink

    Less sovereign eh? The Germans might tell you something else after they gave up the DM with the Euro. They made themselves more economically stronger and increased their political sovereignty too by being able to decide who forms a government in other member states. You are less sovereign if you keep bending over backwards and doing everything that the EU tells you to, like the UK does. It might be an eye opener to our elite but those elsewhere in the EU pick and choses from the directives when it suits them.

    Reply The Germans now have to bail out Greece and the others and will need to make large transfers they don’t want to make.

    • Dame Rita Webb
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:30 am | Permalink

      Well why have they not done it by now and this money is coming directly out of the Bundesbank with no other involvement by the other Euro member central banks? Schauble would quite happily throw them out if he were Chancellor.

      • Hope
        Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:56 am | Permalink

        Ah, but then Cameron claimed he got the UK out of bailing out Eurozone countries. It turned out he did not. Last year the British taxpayer was on the hook for £850 million to help Greece, again. Even though he falsely claimed the UK was not involved he decided to loan Ireland £7 billion! So whether the UK is in or out of the Eurozone clutches under Cameron’s EU Fanatical dream he makes the British taxpayer liable.

        The Tory party needs to rid itself of Cameron. You will need to find a new leader, now is a good a time as any and time for the new leader to be bedded in for the next election. Cameron is not going for election, he arrogantly makes clear Tory supporters are no longer of use to him- they might want to get out of the EU, unlike him and Osborne. Remember Osborne reported as saying no one serious would want to leave the EU. Why would any Tory want him or Osborne in office if the public voted to leave the EU? Cameron stated he will never lead the UK out of the EU and is NOT putting himself forward for the next election! After the current woeful deal he claims as a success what could the British taxpayer expect? Cameron is putting the EU before country and party. Simon Heffer is correct in his article.

        • RB
          Posted February 9, 2016 at 7:14 am | Permalink

          The Tory party needs to rid itself of Cameron. You will need to find a new leader

          >
          Please God save this country and my people by getting rid of Cameron, is what I am praying this morning.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 10:05 am | Permalink

      “It might be an eye opener to our elite but those elsewhere in the EU pick and choses from the directives when it suits them.”

      That is a moot point.

      I know there’s a long running story that the UK is always assiduously obeying EU laws while other countries pick and choose – ergo, if there seems to be anything wrong with a particular EU law then probably you should blame the useless UK rather than the marvellous EU – but the EU Commission keeps a check on the performance of member states in the transposition of directives:

      http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/scoreboard/

      and the UK is not outstanding in its compliance.

      But in any case the levels of non-compliance in the more reluctant member states seems to be pretty low; this is from 2009:

      https://euobserver.com/economic/27651

      “Denmark and Malta came joint top of a European Commission league table published on Thursday (19 February) that measures member state success in transposing internal market directives into national law.”

      “Both countries fell just 5 directives, or 0.3 per cent of the total, short of a perfect transposition rate. The EU average failure rate was 1 percent, in line with targets set for 2009.”

      • Know-Dice
        Posted February 9, 2016 at 8:50 am | Permalink

        Many thanks for this as always Denis…

        I haven’t read it all or fully digested it “yet” but I think the issue for us in the UK is “gold plating”, how much do our civil servants add to the regulations handed down by the EU?

        A quick look at the “traffic light” table here

        http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/scoreboard/performance_overview/index_en.htm

        Does show that the UK is much more compliant than say France or Italy or even Germany.

        And how much does it cost the UK tax payer to produce all these wonderful statistics?

      • Know-Dice
        Posted February 9, 2016 at 9:13 am | Permalink

        Actually looking at that link again, especially the “traffic light” indicators the UK really is much more compliant that the rest of the member countries other than Finland.

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted February 9, 2016 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

          I don’t know which row in the table you’re looking at, but on both “Transposition” and “Infringements” the UK is coloured yellow for “average”. On the first criterion I count 17 countries which are better than the UK, “Above average”, and only 4 which are worse, “Below average”, while in the second criterion I count 9 countries which are better and 5 which are worse.

          I’ve no doubt that there are cases where the UK over-implements directives, partly from fear of under-implementing them and being pulled up and partly from a kind of guilt that we are opting out of the most important things like the euro and Schengen, but it’s a myth that we always obey directives and most of the others don’t.

  3. Leslie Singleton
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 6:35 am | Permalink

    I can just about spell most of their names but where a lot of them are exactly God only knows. Why they should have any sway over us is beyond me.

  4. Lifelogic
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 6:37 am | Permalink

    Exactly.

    It seems that Cameron is about to suggest that the migrants at Calais will all move to the UK should we leave the EU.

    The man really is getting very desperate. Complete and utter drivel from the man as usual.

    • Anonymous
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:56 am | Permalink

      Where are the cries that it is racist to vote to remain in the EU then ???

    • Iain Moore
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:52 am | Permalink

      Indeed he is getting desperate, especially to tell a whopper that everybody can immediately see through, for most people have the experience of international travel where their identity is checked before they get to leave a country, so if migrants are getting into Kent, it is because of the Government’s lackadaisical attitude to border control.

      Cameron is threatening us with his own incompetence.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:58 am | Permalink

      I cannot understand what he is trying to say. Are there immigrant camps inside the American border with Mexico for instance? Or Swizerland inside its border? Or Norway? Or just about anywhere best I can work out? Why is it always the UK that has to be weak and soft and silly? Mind you I didn’t understand what he was trying to say about voting with your conscience either. Did he foresee people voting against their conscience? Could he please say again for my amusement how he has ruled nothing out? That can only mean that if he doesn’t get (some low proprtion of) his ridiculously inadequate letter agreed then by reason of that he is going to want to leave. That would be barking. Whatever the letter – even, very hypothetically, in full – is, it ain’t a game changer for anybody. Waste of time the whole show.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 10:11 am | Permalink

      It’s not just desperate, it’s disgusting.

      What it boils down to is this: the British Prime Minister threatening the British people that if they don’t vote the way he wants he will allow their country to be flooded with illegal immigrants.

      • Mitchel
        Posted February 9, 2016 at 10:31 am | Permalink

        @Denis,he’s obviously contacted the spirit world again and is now channelling the spirit of Col Gaddaffi.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

      So as the polls move more and more towards a leave vote what will the ratter Cameron do? Will he change his mind, or just rat on the referendum promise yet again or will he just delay and delay and hope something comes up?

      This was surely entirely predictable give his failure to negotiate seriously.

      • JoeSoap
        Posted February 8, 2016 at 10:11 pm | Permalink

        Digs himself into a hole then has to mislead and misinform to dig himself out.
        Renewables
        IHT
        Lisbon referendum guarantee
        WHY does he make life so difficult for himself?

        Rather like someone operating a psychological Ponzi scheme, I think he actually likes the intellectual challenge of coming back from a position of complete disadvantage through heaping on more false promises.

  5. Cheshire Girl
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 7:34 am | Permalink

    I see that the Prime Minister is trying to scare us into voting ‘Stay’ by saying that the ‘Jungle ‘ in Calais could come to the UK. Well, surely we would be able to prevent that if we were able to determine our own rules. We would be able to ‘get tough’ with any migrants who tried to set up such a camp.
    It seems to me that the Prime Minister is getting desperate – the Government have been very quick to accuse others of ‘scaremongering’ in the past. Looks like they are doing some of that themselves!

    • turboterrier
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:02 am | Permalink

      Chesire Girl and Lifelogic

      It really gives the perception that he is losing if not lost the plot.

      Hopefully this will drive the out campaigners to strive even harder to rip apart all thee sleeze tactics.

    • ian wragg
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 10:59 am | Permalink

      Of course the jungle will come to Britain because the dopey government would do nothing to stop it.
      You have to remember that Gideons whole growth policy is based on having another 1.3 million in the workforce by 2020 plus another 2.6 million dependants all wanting housing, schools and healthcare.
      Now we have another recession on the way it will be interesting to see the emergency brake and the welfare bill all go up in smoke under the increased pressure.

  6. Mike Stallard
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 7:37 am | Permalink

    And not only would that happen – less influence – but also you would be forbidden to go to the butchers in the first place to buy your Sunday dinner. That would be done for you.
    And then what would you wear? There would be special people appointed to pick clothes for the group. When would you get up in the morning? Doctors would quickly agree on the optimum time and that too would become the norm. What toothpaste would you use? Teeth are one of the most vital parts of the body after all…
    And, as the group of 28 declined, as it is bound to do because people would lose the will to live, you might find a strong man emerging who, alone, could get it working properly by dictating the terms and conditions.
    Since at least 20 of the 28 other people might have a long tradition as slaves and servants of a strong man, you might be outvoted if you objected to his perfectly simple and obvious Directives, might you not…

    • Lifelogic
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:50 am | Permalink

      We were forbidden to have our Rib of British Beef on the bone at one stage.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:51 am | Permalink

        What happened to the BSE scare. Were we not to expect millions of deaths according to the government scaremonger “experts”?

        • hefner
          Posted February 9, 2016 at 8:36 am | Permalink

          That’s a rather thoughtless statement: does the Government not have to follow the precautionary principle when told about some risks to the population?
          I guess you would also be there barking like mad if the number of deaths had grown to epidemic proportion.

          I cannot see how this kind of return to the past helps in any way the present European debate.

          If all contributors on this blog were like you, I would not dare tell my friends to have a look at it.
          Thanks to the few much more balanced and informative contributors.

  7. RB
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 7:40 am | Permalink

    We are the 4th/5th biggest economy in the world, a mighty military power, rich in culture and history. The only country in the world to correctly interpret the Bible properly (Westminster confession). We should not be pooling our sovereignty with these lesser inferior nations or indeed anyone.

    The EU is a socialist project, if Conservative MPs want to join a socialist project they should join the Labour party.

    • ian wragg
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:02 am | Permalink

      I prefer Johns description as an oligarchy which in our case means rule by the Eton Mess.
      I get sick of hearing CMD saying ….because it’s the right thing to do….. when its diametrically opposite to what the population in general want.

  8. DaveM
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 7:49 am | Permalink

    Once again, a concise and simple analogy which should receive far wider publication.

    It seems, though, that this will be impossible due to state-controlled media. The figurehead and leader of the Remain campaign (currently triple-hatting as the PM of the UK and the leader of the Conservative Party) is resorting to more and more desperate measures. First he stops his party faithful from speaking out against the EU, and more disgustingly tells his MPs to ignore their constituents. Then he somehow drags the late Mrs Thatcher into it. Will he be telling us King Arthur was a EUphile next? Now he is making totally unsubstantiated threats about refugee camps appearing in the SE of England. Even if it doesn’t come from his mouth, there appears that no press release from anyone remotely connected to the govt would be authorised without the PM’s say-so, such is the control he now seems to be exercising.

    There is no reason I can see that the bilateral agreement between the UK and France will be affected. And even if the border is moved, under current regulations any immigrants turning up on our shores can just be sent back to the last safe country they were in, ie France.

    Furthermore, and more subtly, the Remain campaign’s publicly funded propaganda outlet, the BBC, seems to have given up on trying to find positives for staying in the EU and is hitting the Irish angle regarding border controls. Is there any reason why the agreement between the UK and RoI should change if the UK leaves the EU?

    Your party leader is behaving like a desperate dictator. This is not democracy. I agree that both sides need to have their say, but there also needs to be an outlet where these claims can be publicly refuted.

    In the mean time, whilst CMD concentrates all his efforts on leading the Remain campaign, our country is effectively leaderless in a time when the country desperately needs a leader in the face of the apparently co-ordinated and evil invasion (and consequent weakening) of Europe. Can’t you do something? Can’t the peopel of Witney be persuaded to recall their MP?

  9. The Prangwizard
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 7:56 am | Permalink

    I understand that Cameron is now saying that with a vote to leave the alleged refugees in Calais in the camps there will come over to Kent to be processed as the French will no longer co-operate in processing them there, and by extension we will have camps like that on our soil.

    It is a blatant scare story, and nonsense, the man is not fit to be the Prime Minister, nor the leader of the Tory party. It follows from your piece yesterday about Lord Powell claiming to speak for Mrs Thatcher.

    Are there no depths that this man will not sink to to save his skin.

    Vote to Leave. Then get rid of Cameron when we have won, he will not be fit to lead any talks after that.

    • Iain Moore
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:56 am | Permalink

      I saw David Davis’s speech at the GO conference in Manchester, and was very impressed, as he is someone with a science degree, and Tate and Lyle management trouble shooter, his would be the CV that you would look for to negotiate our disentanglement from the EU.

    • forthurst
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

      “Then get rid of Cameron when we have won, he will not be fit to lead any talks after that.”

      …then get rid of his corporatist backers, especially the thieving banksters and others whose sole interest is extracting rent out of the British economy: the cheaper the labour, the higher the profit; the higher the population, the higher the rent. These peoples interests are diametrically opposed to ours; this is our country and they are parasites upon it.

    • Monty
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 2:41 pm | Permalink

      The migrants use the seaports and the channel tunnel because the air route is closed to them. Airlines already are made to bear the cost of returning any illegal travellers who arrive on their flights, so they have a massive incentive to ensure only legitimate passengers are allowed to embark.
      The same penalties could and should be applied to the ferries and the Eurostar. I think what the PM is telling us is that he is too timid to play hardball, and scared of his own job. That’s why he wants some cronies in the EU to hide behind when he is afraid to face us. And that is why we have to get out, and start holding our governments to account.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

      But who will lead all these Libdims infected Tory MPs.? Most are simply not Tories they are Cameron types. Or just career politicians want wages,expenses and a good pension. While allowing Osborne to kill everyone else’s pensions.

    • turboterrier
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

      The Prangwizard

      the man is not fit to be the Prime Minister, nor the leader of the Tory party.

      If this referendum was not so critical to the future of this nation then I would suspect that the party would be already planning his demise. But I do think that if we win and get out of the madhouse the man will have no place to hide and will have to resign.

  10. Antisthenes
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:02 am | Permalink

    Currently we are moving toward devolution because we are not happy with centralised collective decision making. We find that a one size fits all decision does not suit everyone or every circumstance. The likes of the SNP, Plaid Cymru and even the Conservatives (although their idea of it is not quite the same as the nationalist parties) are advocates of devolution, but strangely the SNP at least clamour for us to remain a member of the EU. This is typical of the muddled thinking of all who advocate that we remain in the EU. How they ever learned to tie their shoe laces remains a mystery to me.

    They are asking for greater independence to make their own decisions and act upon them yet demand we stay tied to the EU. A body that abhors local decision making or independence of action as that would require them to return most of the powers they have taken away from their member states and placed at Brussels. It would also ensure they would not be able to take any further ones that they plan to do in the future.

    Yet another example of how damaging being a member of the EU is. Like all dictatorships it wants to choose and decide everything for us whether we like those choices and decisions or not.

  11. Alan
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:04 am | Permalink

    This seems a good explanation if why we should leave the UN, NATO, the EU, and the UK.

    • stred
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

      Are you OK Alan? The UN and NATO don’t make 75% of our laws and we don’t have to obey orders from them. Some parts of the UK do want to leave and would have done so, were it not that the majority of the population there decided not to.

    • Kenneth
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 5:40 pm | Permalink

      Yes, and when there is sufficient popular demand for us to leave these institutions, perhaps we will.

      At the moment, though it is the eu that we have a greatest problem with.

  12. bluedog
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:26 am | Permalink

    Cameron’s comments about the Jungle moving to southern England simply illuminate his total inadequacy. If the man holding the office of British PM doesn’t think he can stop 5000 unarmed Africans arriving at Dover, we need to find someone who can. It’s not that difficult.

    • Hope
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:02 am | Permalink

      Churchill faced a bigger threat than migrants! A clue: like Australia we are an island. Stop the boats and send them back. Cameron needs to be got rid of. Totally inadequate and out of his depth. A career politician who does not know the price of milk or negotiate his way out of a paper bag. His comments only serve to demonstrate that he is unfit for office as PM.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:53 am | Permalink

      Indeed. But the Tory MP are in the main so wet, pathetic and essentially Libdim alas.

    • ian wragg
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:05 am | Permalink

      It’s very difficult when you have no knowledge or experience in the real world.
      Armies of socialist do gooders would be manning the barricades to stop the authorities preventing them coming in.
      We would be undermined by our own judiciary.

    • Paul H
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:46 am | Permalink

      The real problem is that you, I, our host, and everyone else can see that Cameron is telling porkies (reference to alleged historic incident not intended), but no-one with authority is standing up and getting the airtime to debunk what he says. It’s about time that a cabinet minister called Cameron’s bluff or got sacked, as the case may be, by defying Cameron’s muzzle and speaking out on the same terms that Cameron grants himself.

      And Gove needs to remember how much Cameron valued the friendship, reported to be causing Gove sleepless nights over the EU, when it was necessary to replace him with Morgan for the naked political purposes. Maybe that was the correct call for the greater good of the party, but presumably most could agree that the good of the country is even more important.

    • DaveM
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

      Indeed, effectively what he is saying is:

      “If you vote to leave the EU, I will not protect our borders sufficiently against invasion”.

      That is a threat, and given the fact that he is the PM and thus entrusted to the country’s security, it amounts to treason.

      (Obviously the word “invasion” is dramatic, but given what we are hearing about the influx of IS terrorists moving through Europe, it could end up being reality.)

      I admire loyalty Mr R, and indeed I admire your party loyalty which (presumably) has an implied loyalty to the leader. However, loyalty goes both ways, and I would question whether Mr Cameron has any loyalty at all towards his party; at the moment his loyalty seems to be to his EU colleagues and himself. Your beloved party is merely a vehicle for his own personal ambition.

    • ChrisS
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

      Hear ! Hear !

    • English Pensioner
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 1:41 pm | Permalink

      Many seem to be better armed than the average British citizen. Guns and pepper sprays seem quite common possessions amongst these so-called refugees. At least within most of the EU, citizens are allowed pepper sprays for self-defence.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

      In 1986 it was agreed through the Treaty of Canterbury that the frontier between the UK and France would be in the middle of the tunnel, not on the French side of the Channel as some pretend is the present case nor on the English side of the Channel as Cameron is threatening now.

      Article 3 here:

      http://www.eurotunnelgroup.com/uploadedFiles/assets-uk/the-channel-tunnel/Treaty-Canterbury-UK.pdf

      So the border controls could be located there, at the actual border, and no doubt that would be technically feasible with a bit more excavation to create the space necessary for all the facilities, but it was also agreed in Article 4(1) that:

      “The frontier controls shall be organised in a way which will reconcile, as far as possible, the rapid flow of traffic with the efficiency of the control”

      and that strongly argued, and still strongly argues, against putting the border controls at the actual border.

      The French are still bound by that treaty, and they are not free to unilaterally decide that henceforth the border will be in Folkestone.

      Surely it is time for the UK government to pay the French the compliment of declaring that France is a safe country, and therefore the UK will no longer entertain any applications for asylum made by persons entering the UK from France, they will simply be sent back to France.

      It’s not as if these people are trying to flee to this country to escape persecution in France, like the Huguenots; and in fact a protocol to the EU treaties recognises that all EU member states are to be considered safe countries, so normally no EU citizen can successfully claim asylum in any of them.

      From Protocol (No 24):

      “Given the level of protection of fundamental rights and freedoms by the Member States of the European Union, Member States shall be regarded as constituting safe countries of origin in respect of each other for all legal and practical purposes in relation to asylum matters. Accordingly, any application for asylum made by a national of a Member State may be taken into consideration or declared admissible for processing by another Member State only in the following cases … “

  13. agricola
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:35 am | Permalink

    It might work if all the neighbours had similar incomes, aspirations ,and worked within a common legal system. Within the EU they do not. It is as unworkable as moving problem families into social housing erected in much more affluent neighbourhoods. It is a formula for disruption and eventual chaos.

    Last night TV ran the first of a series of programmes on Greece. It set out on tourism and then lifted the lid on the resentment among Greeks of the life they were being forced into through belonging to the EU. A system that suited the wealthy but not the majority of people. The differences were stark. There are now third world slums in Greece, and the growing hatred of the Germans was palpable. They see the EU as a repeat of Nazi Germany by a more subtle means. Though one might question their analysis, the hatred is growing. Yes the Greeks led themselves into a fools paradise based on all the early handouts from the EU, but it quickly became unsustainable, and the vast majority of the population having no effective control now subscribe to revolt.

  14. fedupsoutherner
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:42 am | Permalink

    I am sick to death of hearing the lies coming from our PM’s mouth. What an insult to the people of the UK and especially those that voted for the Conservative party. How far away from being Conservative can Cameron get without somebody standing up and saying what a load of old tosh he is talking? Isn’t it about time the cabinet stood up against him like they did with Maggie??

    • ChrisS
      Posted February 9, 2016 at 9:23 am | Permalink

      Trouble is most agree with Cameron, a few that don’t are more interested in furthering their careers than following their beliefs and the genuine Eurosceptics like Villiers and Duncan-Smith are too few and not heavyweight enough to make him desist.

      We have to put up with this for at least another two weeks. Cameron must be deeply shocked at how badly his “renegotiation” package has gone down here. Being a PR man he thought that he could easily pull the wool over everyone’s eyes.

      We, however have know for a long time that it would not amount to much but I for one have been quite surprised just how little the other leaders have been prepared to do to help Cameron keep us in.

      Trying to go back and renegotiate the already-renegotiated deal will be all but impossible. Nothing like enough will be conceded that would satisfy the out campaign and the media, except for the Guardian and the BBC.

      He’s playing poker with a very poor hand.

  15. Bert Young
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:57 am | Permalink

    If my neighbours wish to have a party and get drunk I would certainly not wish to join them ; I am not against the odd glass (or two) but being stupid and going over the top is something I would steer clear of . Joining any sort of a club is a matter of personal choice ; looking back at my life there were clubs that made sense at one time that , today , do not grab me in the same sort of way . Time moves on and one has to shape ones relationships according to all manners of priorities and life-styles .

    There is no doubt that being independent means you decide ; taking the view of others is all very well but when these views are out of kilter with your own and definitely not in the interest of the public , you can walk away and watch them regret their decisions later .

  16. Douglas Carter
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    You might look to the history of occupancy in that street. You will find that several of the wealthier occupants decided that the practice of individual ownership conducted by independent owners became a theological affront to those owners, and in the distant past, managed to convince some of the weak-minded contemporary owners of the same cultish behaviour.

    You may find the independent ownership of your house has become prejudiced by pre-agreed conditions your Conveyancing Solicitor either failed to understand properly, or failed to disclose to you comprehensively. Or perhaps he just lied to ensure you were immersed in the problem before you could back out.

  17. Mick
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:09 am | Permalink

    The Prime Minister will warn that migrant camps could spring up in south-east England if Britain leaves the EU, it was claimed last night. The start of the scare tactics, anyway if Cameron carn’t or won’t stop them coming I’m sure the EDL will be willing to give him a hand ?

  18. Ex-expat Colin
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:11 am | Permalink

    Common Sense (ancient) shows that three parties won’t easily agree, so one likely looses. If just one is too strong …the party is rapidly over!

    If you have ever been in a band you might understand some of this stuff. 28…ask Farage.

    How is that many of us know this stuff but the foolish/feckless have overruled/overrun us?

    You saw the BBC2 travel piece on Greece (Crete) last night? Greece with Simon Reeve -weepy man.

  19. agricola
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:16 am | Permalink

    Another aspect of this enforced neighbourliness is a complete lack of democratic control. There is no mechanism within the EU for bottom up influence other than civil disturbance.

    The EU is all top down direction. Even worse this top down direction is perceived to be largely for the benefit of the major players. Merkel’s invitation for refugees to come to Germany was not motivated by the German people, nor did it take into account the horrendously dangerous journey. The German government wanted more workers to solve their diminishing workforce and the tax take necessary to support an ageing population.

    It is all a question of how long this unbalanced EU can go on. I see it as a beached whale. As the tide ebbs the outcome is inevitable. If our departure hastens the process, so much better for those remaining.

  20. Denis Cooper
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    “The problem is to get the benefit of combined buying I would no longer have a veto on what we bought. I might lose the vote to buy beef for dinner and have to accept the common view of pork … ”

    Rather than going off on the obvious track here I will just say that the question would be how often and much you were prepared to give way to the majority view.

    It might help if the other 27 were not just geographical neighbours but also relations, or at least very good longstanding friends. Then you might be more inclined to shrug off your defeats in the various votes, thinking of the group as a kind of “mini-demos” and being prepared to take part in a “mini-democracy”.

    I’ve said in the past that if a significantly large majority of the Scots are really disgruntled with being constantly outvoted in the UK, as many believe*, and do not see themselves as part of the same “demos” and so are unwilling to accept the decisions made through the UK-wide “democratic” process, then there is a good case for separation even though that would break a link which has endured for three centuries through thick and thin, and even though during that period of the political marriage of the kingdoms there has been extensive personal inter-marriage of their subjects.

    That is, I think, the basic test of whether there is a sufficiently cohesive “demos” for a “democracy” to be viable, whether those who lose on a decision are prepared to shrug their shoulders and accept that defeat with good grace in the interests of peace and stability what they see as a commonwealth, and also assuming that they may be on the winning side on future occasions, or instead they are seized by a festering resentment which grows with every reverse.

    * Although I have read here:

    http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/debunk/vote1

    “Out of the 18 General Elections since 1945, Scotland has got the party at Westminster which won the Scottish popular vote 12 times. That is, exactly two thirds of the time Scotland gets what it wants. For a population which is around one twelfth of the United Kingdom, that is pretty good going … “

  21. oldtimer
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    Thank you for this excellent series of posts on the many aspects of the referendum. I started to print them out and find you are up to #18 already. No doubt there will be many more, including robust rebuttals of the daily scare stories about voting Leave.

    As others have already pointed out, our here today, gone tomorrow Prime Minister has now raised the existence of the Sangatte camp as a reason to stay in the EU! This is desperate stuff.

  22. RB
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    Every time a British MP like Cameron uses scare tactics, saying our security will be at risk if we leave the EU. I feel like I am being threatened, by a British PM, using foreign powers. Sort of gunboat diplomacy. It is beyond treachery to do this. He must stop this nonsense immediately.

  23. Atlas
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 10:18 am | Permalink

    John,

    I remember the Conservative General Election adverts which showed Ed Milliband in the top pocket of the SNP – a good analysis.

    Now we have a similar situation, except this time it is Cameron in the top pocket of the EU Establishment. One for the GO campaign??

    Really, we cannot stop ferries bringing over illegal immigrants? What a feeble man Cameron is proving to be.

  24. David Edwards
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 10:54 am | Permalink

    Commentators keep saying that we are pragmatic and will accept the best deal on offer that provides the greatest economic benefits. But I disagree. It seems more that we are historically highly independent and place great value on the ability to control our own lives, as a people rather than by government. That is where recent political leaders have mistaken us and after six years in office David Cameron is following suit by attempting to suppress thought from the cabinet or elsewhere, and is now parading a very lacklustre negotiation as a personal triumph. Its a terrible shame and rather timid that he will not believe in us in the same way that we do. We seem to want to be out of the EU, we are probably better out of the EU, and it is frustrating that government is so stuck in its thoughts and practices to want to change our opinion rather than to listen to it.

  25. ChrisS
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:05 am | Permalink

    Cameron’s statement about jungle-style camps along the South Coast is plainly complete nonsense. If it were correct we would have camps of illegal immigrants around every major airport.

    The reason we don’t is because the Government made airlines responsible for removing everyone that arrives in the UK without valid travel documents. This has been enough to end the practice and the carriers make sure that nobody boards a plane without appropriate documents.

    The only illegal immigrants now arriving be plane are ones with high quality forged documents and they are a tiny proportion of the total number of passengers arriving in the UK each year. They are mostly dealt with on arrival and detained.

    A change of location of passport control will have no effect on the numbers trying to get onto lorries and into the channel tunnel. They are only doing that because they can’t get through the French exit passport control which is situated before the British one. Are the French going to do away with exit controls ? After the attacks in Paris the answer is, of course, no.

    All the British Government has to do is apply the same rules to the ferry companies as they do to airlines. The ferry companies will, of course, scream and shout but will soon knuckle under. They will not want to be stuck with passengers on their boats that can’t be landed in Britain and the French won’t take back.

    The problem for lorry drivers could easily be solved by banning curtain sided lorries from cross channel routes. Sliding aluminium side doors and more secure rear doors and locks would make it impossible for migrants to break into trucks.

    The French Government are cynically ignoring the situation around the ports which they could resolve if they really wanted to. Problem is, it’s a lot easier for them to do nothing and pass the problem onto the local authority in Calais than it is to detain and insist that all migrants apply for asylum in France and then face deportation if they don’t qualify. I read that only around 10% of those in the jungle are genuine refugees and they have all passed through at least three safe countries before arriving in France.

    Cameron must be really desperate now seeing the polls. Unfortunately the other EU member states and the idiots in Brussels are in total denial that there is any possibililty that British voters would make such a mistake and vote to leave their wonderful institution. There appears little chance yet that they will panic like Cameron, Clegg and Milliband in the face of possible defeat over Scotland.

    • ChrisS
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:27 am | Permalink

      PS : In the unlikely event that the French do renege on the current agreement, we could always put the British border controls onto the boats. After all, passengers have plenty of time to waste on the crossing, even the shortest ones. Those with valid documents would get a landing card.

      Anyone without a valid landing card would not be allowed to go down to the car deck or leave the ferry as a foot passenger when it arrived in Britain. Again, the ferry companies would make very sure that they checked every passengers’ documents before boarding !

  26. David Wiltshire
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:24 am | Permalink

    If 5000 immigrants land at Dover, do you really believe they will hang around to build a camp there.

  27. They Work for Us?
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:25 am | Permalink

    We allow too many people to get here and “land”. Embarkation controls and immediate turn round and return to place of embarkation that get through is required for migrants without a necessary visa or paperwork.

    No individual has a fundamental right to enter another country.

    We need to be resolute about this and just do it, with training programme for border control staff that it is career/ job limiting to allow such people to land. If the French send them straight back then so should we, if necessary again and again and again. Closing ports and the tunnel until recalcitrant French authorities abide by the rules, asylum in the first safe country you reach, clearly not England. We We are saddled with lily-livered leaders that won’t act firmly in case their foreign counterparts might tell them that they are not very nice people. Such talk is cheap, accepting more and more liabilities for the taxpayer isn’t.

  28. Shieldsman
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:34 am | Permalink

    What a pathetic PM, he ignores the Conservative grassroots, the people who worked to return him to office.
    The EU that he wants to remain in is totally incompetent. The 5000 or so illegal immigrants at Calais which the French failed to deport, got in because of the failure of Shengen. It is not an argument for remaining in the EU, quite the contrary.
    It is not the Wehrmacht the other side of the Channel waiting to invade.
    If we had a Cameron type as PM after Dunkirk he would have been out there waving a white flag.
    It would appear according to the SUN the refugees we allowed in are the great people smugglers of today.

  29. Roy Grainger
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:41 am | Permalink

    Yesterday you said “It must be a new low for the stay in campaign when they turn to the dead to support them”. but today that low has been surpassed by Mr Cameron authorising a briefing which says he’ll allow to be established Calais-style jungle camps of refugees across Southern England. It is pathetic he has to resort to threats like that to bolster his position.

  30. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:49 am | Permalink

    According to Mr Cameron, the UK and its Parliament still has Sovereignty. It is not pooled.
    This begs the question of what he was doing recently wandering around Europe chatting with anyone who had the price of a cup of tea.
    His Renegotiation Statement to Parliament did not shed any light on it.

    Today’s media in imperious mode, as authoritative as a weaning puppy, says Downing Street ( not its human occupant, nor the cat ) has issued ( not made ) a statement ( not just says ) that the French will scrap the bi-lateral agreement on the Calais placement of Customs at the French side of the Channel when we leave the EU. Therefore, the UK will have loads of migrants.

    The Rt Hon Mr Downing Street MP obviously believes the 300,000 migrants entering and staying in the last 12 months either came via Dr Who’s Tardis from The Future or perhaps via SG1’s Stargate Wormhole.

    Mr Downing Street is in panic.

  31. acorn
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:50 am | Permalink

    JR, are you saying that federal structures don’t work? The USA seems to have done quite well on it. Admittedly, the federal level of government always comes to dominate and can get out of control, like the USA has and the EU would love to be. The Scots could say the same about the quasi federal UK, England dominates. While in a parallel universe, the English are paranoid about Scottish votes in the federal UK parliament.

    • Pud
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

      The USA at least in theory believes in power being wielded at the lowest possible level so if a county can deal with an issue it does, if it can’t then the state will and only national issues are the responsibility of the federal government. In contrast the EU wishes to keep all power in Brussels.

      • acorn
        Posted February 9, 2016 at 10:20 am | Permalink

        No it doesn’t, but your assertion that it does, is no surprise in comments on this website. The EU Treaty (TEU Article 5), states the principles of Subsidiarity and Proportionality http://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/subsidiarity.html

        What you think is the EU “… keep all power in Brussels” is on the majority of occasions, the UK government keeping power in Westminster and Whitehall. There is very little Treaty required Subsidiarity applied in the UK. The UK has the most centrally controlled administration in the EU / EEA by far. UK local government entities, are basically field offices for Whitehall. That’s why devolution started in the first instance. It was just that the English were too dumb to work it out; and, didn’t give a toss anyway.

        • Pud
          Posted February 9, 2016 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

          Subsidiarity defined according to your link “Specifically, it is the principle whereby the EU does not take action (except in the areas that fall within its exclusive competence), unless it is more effective than action taken at national, regional or local level. It is closely bound up with the principle of proportionality, which requires that any action by the EU should not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties.”
          So if the EU thinks something is “within its exclusive competence” it won’t cede control of it, neither if it believes it can be more efficient. And seeing as “ever closer union” is a treaty condition there’s not much beyond the objectives of the treaties.

  32. Tom William
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

    Small straw in the wind? Collecting my newspaper this morning the newsagent, commenting on the “Calais camps in Dover”scare said it was just that, and he his son and all his sons young friends were voting leave.

  33. stred
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    We are so fed up with the Parish Council making PC laws about everything that we are thinking of moving. But we heard that Bigmouth, the councillor in our road has been over to the next village and told them that we are so brilliant that he wants them in too. Now we hear that because we had a drug dealer and a horizontal sex workshop at no 69 they have done a revaluation and put the council tax up. What next?

  34. Anonymous
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

    Cameron is one step away from phoning up the French and asking them to threaten us to help his in campaign. It needs to be made clear. Any such language is unacceptable. Please stop him doing this.

    • Bert Young
      Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

      French farmers regard the UK market as vital . The volume they export to us represents the continuity and profitability of their production . It would be just as easy for us to close these exports if the French were to disregard the treaty over Calais .

  35. English Pensioner
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

    If you listen to the argument about the camp at Calais moving here if our immigration facilities aren’t in France, can Cameron please explain why there aren’t such camps in, say New York or Boston. US doesn’t have immigration facilities in all countries with flights to the US, if anyone is barred on arrival, they’re on the next flight out, usually at the airline’s expense. So the airlines check you carefully before boarding, it’s in their interest to do so.
    The same rules should apply to those operating the cross-channel ferries and tunnel.

  36. PaulDirac
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

    Regarding the latest on this issue of sovereignty from our PM: The ‘over 24 hour influx of the Jungle camp into the UK’.
    What nonsense, if we are out of the EU we don’t have to abide by their “humanitarian” rules, we have our sovereign courts to decide who can stay.
    The French may allow them in, but we will be free to deport them under OUR rules.

    As the Sky presenter said, this is a reminder of Blair’s infamous “Saddam can bomb us with WMD in 45 minutes.
    Even if the French let them come, they can’t all come in 24 hours.

  37. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

    Off Topic:

    Rt Hon Mr Hammond Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs’ body-language has changed. Since real, truthful and in many cases any news is not available from UK media, one has to look for non-verbal and non-written unintentional signals as to what may be happening in the world. Coupled of course to one-to-one chats with people one knows and with social media.
    The composite picture presenting itself is that the UK Middle-East… strategy… to be charitable ,-is in tatters. “Tschh, nothing works” as the old TV Catweazle character kept saying.
    Turkey is not behaving at all as planned. The Russians were thought to get bogged down in Syria but with planes and Hezbollah ground troops are putting the West and its armed forces to shame. Advancing stridently. Nothing it seems can stand in their way. Even Saudi Arabia being encouraged to sabre-rattle. No they won’t get involved. They’re only good at fighting people who have no means of fighting back. Uneducated stone and catapult -sling carrying people in Yemen and Bahrain.
    So Mr. Hammond is shown looking grim after North Korea sets off a rocket. As if China, really, really, needs to be asked to keep an eye on its extraordinary Korean ally right on its border. Deep frowns, worried looks, deep sombre tones of speaking from the West. But its all about Syria and a Russia that was supposed to fall because of US engineered oil price reduction. But in fact is all the stronger. And with a military which does not have rather dandy hairstyles in its most senior officers. Apart from the new British appointee who is almost bald.
    Oh and the slight matter of Mr Cameron being utterly unable to negotiate a penny and a prayer from EU nations.

  38. graham1946
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

    Damian Green on World at One spouting the same ill informed nonsense as Cameron about the border at Calais moving to Dover. Blown out of the water by Liam Fox, for both legal and practical reasons. Calais mayor was quoted by Green as wanting to do this, but the French government said they won’t. The Stay In crowd are getting more desperate, so that’s a good sign.

  39. Maureen Turner
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 2:23 pm | Permalink

    Pooling sovereignty. Surely we have already pooled our sovereignty. Back in 2014 we had to pay Brussels the sum of £ 1.3 bn. for exceeding their assessment of our economic performance in previous years. Now I’m beginning to see the light JR on what you described last week as the loss of power to control our own taxation.

    The scenario yourself and The Active Citizen set out are slowly, slowly catchee monkey ways to full blown socialism. In fact taken to the ultimate it’s communism and the weirdest part in all of this is why it should be fooling those in our own goverment as it stares them straight in the face.

    The late Baroness Thatcher is often attributed with the following but I understand it was first spoken by Sir Keith Joseph. Socialism is great until you run out of other people’s money = the current path of the European Union = the largest redistribution of wealth among the 28 nations of Western Europe = poverty for all.

  40. Anonymous
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    Why doesn’t Cameron just phone up the French and ask them to park their gunships off the coast while he negotiates with us?

  41. Original Richard
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

    We see today yet another claim made by Europhiles which is the complete opposite of the truth when Mr. Cameron claimed that our borders will be less secure if we leave the EU.

    Or does Mr. Cameron intend to open our borders up to everyone if he loses the referendum ?

    [Concerning the “Jungle” in Calais, why are the people who are helping migrants get into the UK not being charged with assisting entry into the UK of illegal migrants ?
    If lorry drivers can be fined why not those in charge of and working for these “charities” ?]

    Other recent examples are :

    Mr.Major claiming that the UK would be in “splendid isolation” and we would lose our power and influence” if we were not members of the EU when in fact our leaving the EU would mean a return to the world stage rather than being represented by the EU together with 28 differing nations.

    Mr. Hague claiming that the UK could be split up if it voted to leave the EU when in fact it is EU policy to dismantle the UK and replace it with a number of separate EU regions, one of which is even combined with a part of France.

    Or that we would be in financial difficulties when in fact we could save £11billion/year in net payments to the EU (HOC Library Briefing Paper forecast for 2016 #06091 19/01/2016) and avoid all the problems associated with a common currency.

    Or that we would be safer in an EU where enormous cultural changes are about to occur through the expansion of the EU to include a non-European country and the admittance into the EU of millions of non-Europeans.

  42. Margaret
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    Yes you are quite right and what is more your minority view might become theirs in 10 years , but slightly out of its original context and in time and shift would lose its power. Bad examples of the single voice gaining power is Germany’s Hitler. There was a programme about Greece and the Greek islands yester evening and the reports show the Greeks still blaming the Germans for their present problems.

  43. Tim Bennett
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

    Thank you for such a simple and effective means of illustrating the drawbacks of such concepts as “pooling sovereignty” and “working together” with other countries. I try to persuade people against supporting the EU whenever the issue arises, and I find illustrations such as this one much more effective than abstract discussions about national sovereignty and self-determination. Most people have no time or inclination to engage in philosophical discussions. Do please provide more of these simple examples that we can use in our discussions.

  44. Yosarion
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

    With those that sit around in a hammock and tell us that the EUSSR is the best for us, maybe it would be a good idea to set up a collection for refugees and transport them to the Island of Necker

  45. RB
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:15 pm | Permalink

    Cameron has used our trump card against us and now the BBC are reporting as main news, with help of his old school pal James Landale that to control immigration we have to stay in the EU. The BBC actually said Cameron warned MORE would come if we leave the EU. This was second biggest story on BBC News with just a few seconds of Liam challenging it ineffectively, probably due to the editing?

  46. RB
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 8:16 pm | Permalink

    Surely this is good enough reason for a leadership contest?

  47. RB
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 9:23 pm | Permalink

    If you don’t want someone to do something you do not give them the idea. This is sabotage.

    The money we save on our EU membership would pay for robust immigration control as happens at airports. We would also be in control of our laws to deny access and expel anyone refused entry.

  48. Original Richard
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 10:21 pm | Permalink

    There is no way that the French want us to take in their migrants in the Calais jungle.

    They realise that if we do this the numbers of migrants travelling through France to Calais will increase 1o0 fold.

    In fact the mayor of Calais has often said in the past that the reason she has the jungle is because the UK is a “soft touch” when it comes to illegal migrants – for instance the fact that we have no identity cards and it is so easy for them to find illegal work in Kent.

  49. Tim
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 10:22 pm | Permalink

    I applaud you Mr Redwood wholeheartedly in your views on the EU. You have consistently applied pressure from within the Conservative party and clearly are forced to reside on the back benches because you have put your principles above personal advancement.

    Nevertheless it would be appreciated if you were to concede that your pressure from within and UKIP’s pressure externally have jointly forced the referendum on to the agenda. Had only one side existed we would not be where we are. Your dismissal of UKIP as a wasted vote, I hope, after a successful refererendum, you will retract.

    Boris, Gove and May are indicating they will back Remain. What sorry bedfellows you share in a once great party.

  50. alte fritz
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 10:39 pm | Permalink

    I groaned on hearing the ‘pooled sovereignty’ canard be wheeled out again by the EU lobby. I understand sovereignty to be the right and ability to determine one’s own affairs. Nations limit the former by treaties which may expire or be abrogated. Although the EU technically admits the possibility of secession, the ‘remain’ case is largely based on the supposition that the ability to leave is a fiction.

    Once you cede sovereignty, it is gone and can only be regained by a revolution. I am feeling somewhat revolutionary.

  51. Gina Dean
    Posted February 8, 2016 at 11:40 pm | Permalink

    Why could we not set up a court at Dover with judges who are like minded at saving our country. Give a quick result to deport any unwanted people. I thought we could get rid of them to apply in another country for asylum. Turn around could be quick.
    none of this putting them up in hotels. Giving them bail to disappear into the black economy.
    It is time we were much more ruthless in stopping unwanted in this county.
    Use the army if necessary to check and stop.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted February 9, 2016 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

      Remind the French that France is a safe country, and therefore refuse to entertain any applications for asylum by illegal immigrants coming from France, instead just send them straight back to France.

  52. Alexis
    Posted February 9, 2016 at 2:19 am | Permalink

    Thank you.

    The ‘pooled sovereignty’ concept annoys me greatly. You cannot pool sovereignty, only lose it. And we have lost it.

    Let’s get it back!

  53. ChrisS
    Posted February 9, 2016 at 9:57 am | Permalink

    David Cameron is looking foolish this morning after the French Interior minister said there are no plans to end the border treaty with the UK.

    He rightly pointed out that it’s in French interests at least as much as ours. Unlike our own Great Leader, the French realise that ending the agreement would be seen as a Merkel-like invitation to hundreds of of thousands more economic migrants to come to Calais and Dunkirk every month.

    One thing is already certain, after the botched renegotiation, his stupid statements and downright untruths, if the referendum is lost, Cameron really will be toast. I’m not sure he can really last much longer if he wins it.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted February 9, 2016 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

      That’s why he’s called in a previous ambassador to France to agree with him and tell us that the French are doing us a great favour by allowing illegal immigrants to enter their country and then cross it unhindered to get to the Channel.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page