Controlling borders and watering down the deal

The mistake over our border at Calais reveals not just a misunderstanding of French politics, but also a misunderstanding of how independent countries control their borders. It was an own gaol given the French government’s rapid statement they would want to keep the Calais arrangements. They fully understand that if they sent a different signal implying people could go to the UK easily they would greatly intensify the pressure on France as well.

Outside the EU the UK would require all ferry and train companies bringing foreign passengers in to pre check passengers as airlines are required to do at present. Travellers as on an airline would have to show ID documents and necessary visas and permits to enter the country they are travelling to before boarding the train , ferry or plane. We do not see camps around Washington airport or New York harbour as travellers to the US know these international borders are policed and the travel companies using those ports have to comply with the rules. Were any train or ferry service to fail to do this they would need to take the people back at their cost.

The case of the BSE campaign seems to be that independent countries cannot control their own borders. This is not the experience of many independent countries around the world. In the UK’s case it is easier than for many others, as the main part of the UK is an island surrounded by the sea. This means most people arriving here arrive at a relatively few large ports and airports where it is possible to police arrivals well.

Meanwhile we learn that the French and others do not want it accepted that the EU is a multi currency area. They want all countries save the two opt out countries to have to join. They also do not want the UK having any veto over what the Euro area needs or wants, making it more difficult for us to live alongside it in the same organisation. Other countries are trying to weaken the already hopeless emergency brake on benefits. The one good thing about this negotiation is it should leave no-one in any doubt that a lot of power has gone from this country under past treaties, and no powers are coming back any time soon because the rest of the EU does not want us governing ourselves.


  1. Lifelogic
    February 14, 2016

    You are exactly right. Ireland might be rather harder to deal with, but clearly it is far easier to deal outside the EU straight jacket than in it.

    So why JR do so few conservative MPs take your sensible line? Perhaps just 80 or even less?

    I had never noticed Stephen Crabb the Welsh Secretary before seeing him on Question time this week. What a hugely unimpressive man he is like most of Cameron’s ministers he was wrong on almost everything he uttered.

    I see that the polls are showing it at about 51 for in 49 for out. As it becomes clear the remain side are really struggling will far more MPs abandon Cameron’s poorly led & sinking ship?

    Will Cameron just rat again on his referendum promise, or hold the referendum then ignore the result, or find yet more daft ways to try to scare people or will he try to slope the field of play even further? Cameron’s UK Sovereignty bill proposal is patently a complete joke/fraud against the voters. Why on earth does Michael Gove not say this, instead of going along with it and looking so stupid?

    When will we finally get the referendum date? Will it be just a couple of days before the referendum, in order to prevent that lack of any rational arguments from the remain side becoming even more clear than it is already?

    Even if you are in favour of remaining in, there is clearly no reason at all to vote “remain” in this first referendum anyway, there will certainly be a second “try and get it right this time” one to follow. That is just how the EU works.

    1. Denis Cooper
      February 14, 2016

      Cameron’s sovereignty bill proposal is like deja vu all over again.

      November 4th 2009:

      “David Cameron: A Europe policy that people can believe in”

      “A United Kingdom Sovereignty Bill, to ensure the ultimate sovereignty of the UK Parliament. Unlike many other European countries Britain does not have a written constitution. Given the increasing amount of EU law with which we have to deal we would amend the law to insert a sovereignty clause, to make it explicit that ultimately Britain’s Parliament is sovereign and cannot be overruled by the EU against its will. This is similar in principle to the situation in Germany whereby the German constitution (the basic Law) is ultimately supreme. This would not mean striking down individual items of EU legislation but would provide ultimate constitutional safeguards against any attempts by EU judges to erode our sovereignty.”

      This was supposed to have been done by the coalition government through Part 3 of the European Union Act 2011:

      but apparently it needs to be done again.

      There are some other interesting bits in that statement of November 4th 2009, for example about the various powers that Cameron wanted to repatriate from the EU, none of which have figured in his demands for EU “reforms”, and then this:

      “We will seek to give these measures legal effect by adding them to a future accession Treaty. This is the same mechanism that will give effect to the ‘Irish guarantees’ and also the more recent ‘Czech guarantees’ and we would seek to mirror it for the above British guarantees too.”

      Except that while the Irish got their promised protocol added to the next accession treaty, that for Croatia, as approved by our Parliament here in 2013:

      “European Union (Croatian Accession and Irish Protocol) Act 2013”

      the Czechs did NOT get their promised protocol and it is dead and buried.

    2. Phil_Richmond
      February 14, 2016

      Some very good points as usual Lifelogic. I disagreed with nearly everything that Stephen Crabb said and he came across as not very bright with no principles what so ever. He didnt answer the question on immigration and just insulted Farage.
      As someone who was a Conservative Party member until 2006 (when I couldnt take Cameron anymore) I really dont understand how JR can stay in this woeful party. If you are a true conservative then you have two options. 1) Overthrow Cameron and his tribe of Social Democratic wet quislings. 2) Or break away and form a new party.

      Just look at others like Nicky Morgan for example. How can any conservative tolerate being in the same room as these people?

      1. Lifelogic
        February 14, 2016

        He surely stays because the real Tories need to recover the Tory party from all the Cameronite/Liddim types. To gain power in a FPTP voting system you need the Tory brand (badly tarnished though it is by the appalling leadership of the no nation Tories Heath, Major & Cameron).

        There are too many, always have always will, vote X voters to break through in any other way, given the systems that pertains.

        Look how many MPs UKIP got per vote cast.

    3. Hope
      February 14, 2016

      Today we have Hammond showing himself to be a fraudster in his claims that the EU needs the UK to shape its image. The UK lost the last 72 occasions it did not agree with an EU proposal! Is the influence at the top table Euro fanatics like Hammond spout on about? How about Cameron’s claim I will not pay the extra£1.7 billion. Not only do he pay but it turned out to be £2.9 billion, nearly twice the amount! Could pay for a few doctors with that. As one of a few net contributors out of 28 countries, what are the prospects of the majority saying we agree with the U.K. When it is against their financial interest? How about Cameron’s stance on closing the expensive Strasburg or preventing £90 million being spent on it? He gave up not to upset the French. This morning we read the spat between Mr Cash and his German counter part. One of the reported spiteful German claims is that Cameron would have to get Brussels authority to curb immigration! These are not friends. Hammond is deluded if actually believes what he said on Marr. Moreover, now could anyone believe a word he says about the EU. An alleged Eurosceptic now showing his true colours.

      1. Lifelogic
        February 14, 2016

        Indeed Hammond was talking nonsense, shaping the EU is not something the UK can achieve. Other than by showing the others the door and all the many advantages of leaving.

    4. DaveM
      February 14, 2016

      Regarding your last line, it’s not up to the EU. To quote from the Manifesto:

      “we will honour the result of the referendum, whatever the outcome.”

      Although I’m taking the Manifesto with a very large pinch of salt now.

      1. Denis Cooper
        February 15, 2016

        The referendum Act does not say what would ensue from a vote to leave.

  2. Lifelogic
    February 14, 2016
    1. Lifelogic
      February 14, 2016

      The poll suggest the 47 per cent of voters say Britain would be better able to control the Calais border outside the EU – compared to just 29 per cent who disagree.

      So the public is not as daft and Cameron takes them to be. How could anyone think border control would get worse when membership of the EU obliges us to take everyone from in the EU?

      1. Hope
        February 14, 2016

        Cameron is responsible for providing security of our country. He boldly claims he is unable to do so by his own incompetence! This should be his number one priority. He makes it clear he could not stop unarmed migrants crossing the channel and setting up camps! What chance if we, the UK, were threatened by a proper army with Cameron in charge! He is a totally lost cause, his lack of vision, drive and passion for his country is remarkably low. He has no courage of convictions for his bold claims, speaks a lot, promises a lot and delivers nothing. He said he he fails deliver kick him out. I am waiting for his party to do exactly that.

        1. Lifelogic
          February 15, 2016


    2. alan jutson
      February 14, 2016

      I see it is being reported in the press that President Obama is going to come to the UK in a couple of months, to speak on DC’s behalf that theUK should stay in the EU.

      I see it is also being reported in the Press that a certain German politician, Gunther Krichbaum ((Head of the Bundestag’s EU affairs Committee) has said if we vote to leave, there will be a trade war against us.

      I cannot think of two better recent examples, of people who are looking bonus to support their own national interests, as selfish reasons to try and keep us tied to The EU

      America wants us to be their influence and Voice within the EU.
      The Germans want us to help share the load on payment, and also to help support their immigration problems.

      Time we also took action to serve our own National best interest and to get out before we become the lap dog with no real power to stand on our own two feet.

      The so called Deal is slowly being watered down every day, as we wait, and wait, and wait, to see what we are offered.

      “Offered” being the key word.

      No wonder DC ‘s ratings have gone down in the past few weeks, as few look up to someone who is seen begging, when they do not have to !

      1. alan jutson
        February 14, 2016


        Predictive text strikes again …”bonus” should be “through us”

        1. Hope
          February 14, 2016

          Obama should be told the UK should surrender to the EU and give up all its history, culture and sovereignty on the same day the USA drops its border with Mexico accepts its Supreme Court can be over ruled by the Mexican court and has to pay billions to Mexico so it can trade with it and to allow the Mexicans to improve all southern American country infrastructure with US taxpayers’ money. In addition all the people of southern American countries will be provided, as a right, with free health care, education and welfare benefits. I wait for the BBC journalist to pose it to Obama.

      2. zorro
        February 14, 2016

        These people are showing their true colours now….. Totally desperate and negative in the way they are trying to keep the UK in the EU come what may. Bring on Obama, bring on the German threats, bring on the BSE devotees….. More and more ammunition for the door. Why would anyone want to stay in such a threatening marriage, where your partner issues threats if you want to leave or dare express a contrary opinion about the direction of your marriage. A classic case of abuse…..


      3. bluedog
        February 14, 2016

        ‘a certain German politician, Gunther Krichbaum ((Head of the Bundestag’s EU affairs Committee) has said if we vote to leave, there will be a trade war against us.’

        No surprise. They’ll go for the City too. But two can play at that game if they are stupid enough to start. The UK will be a member of the WTO in its own right following Brexit, and a trade war would put the EU in breach.

  3. The Active Citizen
    February 14, 2016

    As usual you cut through much of the froth. I’d like to comment on your latter point, as I’m sure most will comment on the borders issue.

    “Meanwhile we learn that the French and others do not want it accepted that the EU is a multi currency area.”

    The EU’s formal plan is that Euro member countries will submerge themselves into political and economic union by 2025 – just nine years away. (Source: The 5 Presidents’ Report.)

    Only two countries are currently exempt from this plan – the UK and Denmark. All the other 26 will either effectively merge their countries, or will be committed to doing so the moment they join the Eurozone, which is compulsory under the Treaty.

    Once again we must state strongly:
    There will be no ‘status quo’ on the ballot paper. There’s prosperous independence (Leave), or the wild ride to political union with an increasingly failing Eurozone (Stay).

    When the rest of the EU has banking, fiscal, monetary and political union, where does that put the UK in the EU? Utterly sidelined, unprotected, and with no influence. That’s the ‘Stay’ choice for the electorate when they vote in the Referendum.

    I confidently predict that this Thurs/Friday Mr Cameron will claim that he’s succeeded in “beefing up the deal” and has won, due to a concession widely being reported in advance that the UK’s in-work benefits arrangement will apply for seven years. The benefits will still be increased over 4 years until migrants are on full benefits, but the policy will last longer, that’s all. That’s defeat.

    The Remainians will say that during those seven years, the UK will be able to effect Treaty change so that we gain further exemptions from the EU’s diktats over our benefits policies. However if we can’t get what we want now, when threatening exit, does anyone seriously think the EU will give it to us once we’ve ‘committed ourselves to the EU’? (That’s how it will be presented in Brussels if we vote to stay.)

    In all the fuss about this non-concession, the UK’s non-protection from the Eurozone’s domination of the EU will hardly be mentioned to the public.

    “He who controls the money, controls everything.” The club’s money will be the Euro, and Germany effectively controls that. The EU will make its decisions based on its’ own interests, which will not be the UK’s.

    Naturally on Thursday Mr Osborne will be thrown a few tidbits of Belgian waffle which he and the PM will dress up as new Rosbif protections, but they won’t amount to diddly-squat.

    For the UK’s economy not to be seriously harmed, we need autonomy. And the only way to get that is to vote to leave.

    1. Denis Cooper
      February 14, 2016

      I think I prefer the label “Remainders”, sort of leftovers.

      1. old salt
        February 14, 2016

        I saw somewhere being referred to as Remainiacs.

        1. Denis Cooper
          February 15, 2016

          Good one, although only for those who really are euromaniacs.

    2. Denis Cooper
      February 14, 2016

      “… if we can’t get what we want now, when threatening exit, does anyone seriously think the EU will give it to us once we’ve ‘committed ourselves to the EU’?”

      In the autumn of 2010 Merkel demanded a radical EU treaty change to provide a legal base for the European Stability Mechanism, and Cameron agreed to let her have it without asking for anything substantive in return.

      This EU treaty change was subject to a virtually complete media blackout, quite disgraceful in what is supposed to be a democracy, and so most people are still unaware of its existence. One of the few commentators to have written about it is Andrew Lilico, and this is what he said in June 2012:

      “Probably our last realistic chance of renegotiating our position within the EU was in December 2010, at the time of the major revision to the Lisbon Treaty that occurred then. If we weren’t going to ask for any repatriation of powers at that stage, with an incoming government led by a party that had run at the previous three General Elections promising to repatriate powers, and with the Eurozone totally dependent on our agreeing to the Lisbon Treaty being revised, we were never going to have any credibility in seeking to renegotiate.”

      And that will be even more the case if we now vote to stay in the EU.

      1. The Active Citizen
        February 14, 2016

        Denis old chap, I’ve been reading JR’s diary for a few years – only commenting more recently – and I always enjoy the information you provide.

        I agree with most of your conclusions but not all, as I tend to favour more drastic solutions than are suggested sometimes by the fine letter of the law or precedents you find. I believe that where there’s a political will (if there ever is one), there’s a way. I hope that JR will soon be back in Cabinet and that will help enormously in cutting through any nonsense.

        However your research is excellent and your posts make a good read, so thank you. You should offer your research services to the GO campaign, assuming they win the Electoral Commission’s designation.

        1. Mitchel
          February 15, 2016

          @The Active Citizen – “….as I tend to favour more drastic solutions than are suggested by the fine letter of the law….”

          You are not the only one.The heroic Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote:-
          “I have spent all my life under a communist regime and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed.But a society with no other scale than a legal one is not quite worthy of man either”

    3. forthurst
      February 14, 2016

      “The Remainians will say that during those seven years, the UK will be able to effect Treaty change so that we gain further exemptions from the EU’s diktats over our benefits policies.”

      The issue of the benefit entitlement of EU migrants is a straw man argument because firstly the take up of tax credits by them is generally low and second, the disparity between the British Minimum wage and that in the ex-Bolshevik satrapies is huge; see charts in David Davis speech, “Brexit: what would it look like?”

      We should not allow ourselves to be tricked into trying wasting our breath by trying to refute the sustainability of CMD’s ‘deal’ when in practice it would have no effect whatsoever on the desirability of the UK as a destination.

  4. Lifelogic
    February 14, 2016

    I see that Easyjet warns that cheap flight are at risk from a BREXIT. Who is pulling their strings I wonder? Why on earth do they come out with such patent drivel? There are plenty of cheap flights to places outside the EU after all and fuel should be rather cheaper outside the EU too. If flights to the EU became too expensive it would only harm the EU’s tourist industry, as people would go elsewhere.

    1. stred
      February 14, 2016

      We fly with Norwegian. Better in some wayss and expanding rapidly. Non EU but all over it.

    2. mike fowle
      February 14, 2016

      It is disappointing to see The Times and Sunday Times indulging in such propaganda. Last week The Times had smear stories about UKIP. Given the EU’s unquestioning devotion to the climate change hysteria, it is quite likely that in due course they will impose restrictions and levies on all air travel.

      1. alan jutson
        February 14, 2016


        They are using examples of air fares in the 1990’s to support their argument.

        I thought we joined in 1973 !!!

        By the same argument you could say in 1973 most of the UK did not have, and perhaps could not afford colour televisions because of the cost.

        So if we believe that argument, then the same could be said that Colour TV’s will go up in price, if we leave.!!

        What complete and utter nonesense.. !!!!

    3. Denis Cooper
      February 14, 2016

      I don’t know who is pulling Easyjet’s strings or why.

      I do know that during the second referendum in Ireland Ryanair made massive interventions in favour of the Lisbon Treaty:

      “RYANAIR HAS emerged as the campaigning group with the biggest declared spend on the Lisbon Treaty referendum after its chief executive Michael O’Leary confirmed its costs were “just under €500,000”.”

      “Europe has certainly been good for Ireland. Without Europe’s policy on deregulation, Open Skies, Ryanair wouldn’t exist.”

      “Pressed repeatedly about whether he was campaigning for a Yes vote because he wants EU backing for his interest in Aer Lingus, the Ryanair chief executive insisted that “whether we vote Yes or No to Europe on Friday it won’t alter what’s going to happen with Aer Lingus”.”

      Obviously the Easyjet woman Carolyn McCall is well aware that the European Common Aviation Area covers not just the 28 EU member states but 36 countries in all, and she should explain why the UK cannot continue to be part of that once it has left the EU. It says here:

      “Any airline owned and controlled by nationals of EU member states is free to operate anywhere within the EU without restrictions on capacity, frequency or pricing. The European Common Aviation Area (ECAA) covers 36 countries and 500 million people. CAPA believes if the UK were to leave the EU, its airlines would no longer enjoy automatic access to this market, although the UK might negotiate continued access. The most obvious way for the UK to do this would be to participate in the ECAA Agreement in the same way as countries such as Norway currently do. CAPA says it would be questionable whether continued pan-European access would be popular in the EU for easyJet which has caused significant competitive damage to European legacy airlines. Being Irish, Ryanair would continue to have access to the European market, but if the UK had left the EU, this could cause Ryanair difficulties operating in what is its largest country market. Hence Michael O’Leary is backing the UK’s continued EU membership.”

      Or I suppose he could back the obvious alternative, which would be the UK ‘s continued participation in the ECAA Agreement after it has left the EU.

      I also note about Carolyn McCall, here:

      “In 2015 Carolyn was asked by the Prime Minister to join his Business Advisory Group. The body is made up of business leaders from large companies who will advise the Prime Minister and the Government on business issues.”

    4. Denis Cooper
      February 14, 2016

      I’ve been looking at the Multilateral Agreement establishing the European Common Aviation Area, here:

      and I note that:

      a) The UK and all the other countries are individually listed as parties; and

      b) There are nine protocols dealing with transitional arrangements for nine of the parties – seven in the Balkans on top of Bulgaria and Romania.

      So it seems that it would be an almost trivial task to add a tenth protocol saying that although one of the parties, the UK, would be leaving the EU on such and such a date it would still participate in this treaty as before.

      Provided, of course, that all the other parties agreed, and why shouldn’t they? If it was fine having cheap flights to and from the UK when the UK was in the EU, why exactly would it no longer be fine after the UK had left the EU?

    5. zorro
      February 14, 2016

      It is all arrant nonsense. What about cheap flights to the US? Last time it is competition and diversity of provision which drives better deals. The are stooping so low already to scare people to death……

      So, if the terms on offer were even worse, or we had to offer our first born on the Brussels altar and say daily prayers to Mama Merkel, I’m sure these same people would be using the same baseless arguments to scare people that it is a price worth paying. A complete counsel of despair! It is abject that our suppose elite kowtow so ridiculously and refuse to represent their electorate and govern with their consent.


    February 14, 2016

    Millions of young men of fighting age from North Africa, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria,and Afghanistan wandering around the whole of the EU shows how good the EU is at border controls.
    Not past tense. They are still coming.

    1. Alan
      February 14, 2016

      Millions (actually thousands) of young men of working age from North Africa, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria,and Afghanistan are working in the EU. Very few are fighting.

    2. Anonymous
      February 14, 2016

      Calais is no mistake, merely a migration-to-England bottleneck. We can’t admit that we also operate an open border, but all these pushy young blokes know that they will make it to Britain slowly and surely (as our daily experience on the streets tells us they do.)

      I doubt that many at the Calais camp have been there long. The flow is constant and the route established and world famous.

      The official approval for illegal entry is tacit but exists nonetheless and we will have to have a migrant amnesty at some point. There will not (and cannot) be the mass deportations needed to restore the value of British citizenship.

      Thereafter will have to follow the redistributive equality policies.

      This inflow will not stop until the average person in Britain is at the same impoverished level as the average person from North Africa or the Middle East.

      The future in Britain is socialist.

      The demographics will demand this.

      1. Anonymous
        February 14, 2016

        If anyone is expecting migration to slow after an Out vote then think again. The desire for mass immigration in to our country comes from within Britain.

        1. forthurst
          February 14, 2016

          “The desire for mass immigration in to our country comes from within Britain.”

          …but not from within the English population.

          1. zorro
            February 14, 2016

            Exactly… They need the will to enforce border controls, otherwise, it will be a renting, race to the bottom hopeless future for young people in an over-populated and very floody UK.


      2. Mitchel
        February 15, 2016

        “The future in Britain is socialist”
        Well it might be called that but it won’t be text book socialism because in the real world it never is.

        What we having imposed upon us is the Blair-Clinton “Third Way”-governments which impose culturally Marxist social policy but,learning from the experience of the USSR and Maoist China,quietly contract out economic policy to a technocracy-effectively a handful of big banks,technology companies and other multinationals.

        Everything those heirs to Blair,Cameron and ,particularly,Osborne do fits in with this….and why do you think the “master” himself remains so intensely interested in the EU Project?

  6. Mike Stallard
    February 14, 2016

    I am so glad you can see this. It is not paranoia: the French – not to mention M. Juncker and the Spinelli people – want the Eurozone to be the nucleus of the superstate. I think they also would really like to see one big state (with themselves in charge, naturally) stretching from Shannon in Eire right through to the Crimea.
    Sounds mad?
    Well, if you think that, you haven’t been doing your homework. I will not bother to put all the references. It would take far too long.

  7. agricola
    February 14, 2016

    You are absolutely correct on the management of borders. The current Achilles heel at present is the unchecked entry to mainland UK from Ireland with an additional lax border between Ireland and Northern Ireland. How long before economic migrants decide to travel France- Ireland – UK if they are not doing it already. Go to Dublin and you will (meet migrants ed)on the street.

    France has always been a stroppy mistress, it is in her genes. On the question of currency she will have to bow to the market and it’s requirements, like it or not.

    True, you look at this re-negotiation and realise it has been a very incompetent PR exercise run by a minor operative. The man on the 39 bus realises this and will vote with his feet if for no other reason than he has to suffer the consequences of totally uncontrolled immigration when he goes to hospital, tries to find a school for his kids, a home for his family, and getting to work on overcrowded transport. Not least having to listen to people in the Westminster bubble who can isolate themselves with wealth in the Cotswolds, telling him how wonderful it all is.

    1. agricola
      February 14, 2016

      I did not realise that Arabic as a language had to be censored on your site.

  8. bluedog
    February 14, 2016

    One can begin to see the outline of a complete re-arrangement in British politics. As Labour heads for a Trotskyite future under comrade Corbyn, many patriotic Labour MPs will be thinking hard about the future of Britain as something other than a marxist satrapy on the western periphery of Europe. So where do they go?

    Similarly, many Conservative patriots will be incensed by the futility of Cameron’s non-binding non-deal with the EU, once it becomes clear that in concrete terms he has achieved nothing. There will be nothing of substance that is not conditional on QMV and certainly no treaty change. As Dr JR suggests, the impotence of the UK will be laid bare. How then can young Conservative MPs retain their confidence in a leader whose ‘achievement’ is simply pretence? So where do they go?

  9. Ex-expat Colin
    February 14, 2016

    Farage and Galloway on common out message last night (RT Sputnik). Just needs all to join in harmony (GO) and ram the message home…here!

    Crabb on QT tells us the World is on the get used to it. Their coming and I don’t think thats tourism. The EU instructs Wales not anyone on that panel and saying we are all immigrants from the outset is plain stupid.

    USA still trying to corner Russia I note. Is it a cold war on the horizon?

  10. Antisthenes
    February 14, 2016

    David Cameron is a PR man and he is manipulating all of us. He cannot get any meaningful reform of the EU and he cannot repatriate any powers back to the UK. So he is resorting to other means to convince us that membership is in our best interests. Those means he is employing are not very noble or even honest ones he is employing FUD and throwing in a lot of untruths. Spin and PR are subjects he is very familiar with so as he has nothing else he is resorting to them.

    Of course we can control our borders better outside of the EU as we can do so much better outside with everything else that Europhiles claim we can only do inside. It is no mean feat to take that which is false and make it believable but that is what Cameron and all the rest of the Europhiles are doing well enough that too many are not seeing what is as plain as the nose on their faces the real truth.

    1. Maureen Turner
      February 14, 2016

      To: Antisthenes

      You are correct he is a PR man and therein lies the problem in that what we really needed was an individual who was uncompromising in his renegotiation strategy i.e., a tough hard bloke. What we have is the opposite an all PR gloss and presentation merchant with the sole aim to accommodate and please so is it any wonder he gets the run around in Brussels.

      Again, you are correct when you say “he cannot repatriate any powers back to the UK”. One of the reasons for this is he more or less announced from the outset to his many travels around the EU he wanted to see the UK remain in this Club. The naivety of this is almost beyond belief with the result which can hardly be unexpected he has well and truly boxed himself into a corner. All that is left now is to grovel in Europe and bully at home which he must surely see as unbecoming of a UK Prime Minister.

      An island as small as the UK should be able to control its borders but where is sufficient effort being made to do this. We are not in Schengen but if the exterior borders of the group are porous we might as well be.

      If ever a democratic country’s people were being coerced into giving up their nationhood and its right to self determination we have to be those people. A few Sundays back Christopher Booker writing in the DT summed up our plight by saying – on an issue of this magnitude the quality of debate is poor. Sadly, Mr. Booker is correct but at least we have the vote and can only hope the electorate see past the obvious spin and vote to Leave. What a mess.

  11. Kenneth
    February 14, 2016

    In an on-line article on the BBC News website entitled “UK and the EU: Referendum in a time of discontent”, fated 10th February 2016 Gavin Stewart stated:

    “What links Europe and America is the powerlessness of those in power in the face of globalisation or that is how it often appears. What many voters seem to want is control and authority.”

    He was referring primarily to immigration. However, the concept of ‘globalisation’ is another one of those fantasies the BBC likes to promote just like it promotes so-called ‘international law’ or ‘equality’. These fantasies are cultivated in their own minds and then projected onto us.

    The use of the word ‘powerlessness’ by the BBC is typical of those who want us to stay in the eu. They will try to have us believe that there us an inevitability in millions of immigrants coming into our country. They will paint our country as vulnerable and weak and requiring ‘friends’ to help it.

    The truth is simpler: we did not let millions more immigrants because the world has become more cosmopolitan. We did not let them in because somehow we were physically overpowered at our borders.

    We let them in and let them stay in, because our government chose to do so without any consent from the British People.

    What is obviously true is that, if we let a lot come in then many more will try to come in. This is nothing to do with some mysterious force that we cannot control. Once we are out of the eu we can control immigration perfectly well as we did in the past and as many independent countries do right now.

  12. Brian Tomkinson
    February 14, 2016

    JR: “Meanwhile we learn that the French and others do not want it accepted that the EU is a multi currency area. They want all countries save the two opt out countries to have to join.”
    They needn’t worry, the European Commission state: “The euro area includes those EU Member States that have adopted the single currency. But the euro area is not static – under the Treaty, all EU Member States have to join the euro area once the necessary conditions are fulfilled, except Denmark and the United Kingdom which have negotiated an ‘opt-out’ clause that allows them to remain outside the euro area.”
    It is clear to me that if we were so unwise as to remain in this organisation then adoption of the euro would follow as the Prime Minister of the day would say ‘In order to have our voice heard at the top table’.

    1. Denis Cooper
      February 15, 2016

      Thanks, I find that useful clear statement here:

      All EU Member States have to join the euro area “under the Treaty”, it says, and that can only be changed by a change to the treaty.

      Not by any statement from Tusk or the European Council or from Juncker or the EU Commission or from anyone in the EU Parliament or any other institution, nor by any promise that the treaty will be changed at some indeterminate point in the future, but by an actual change to the treaty, negotiated, agreed, signed and then ratified by all EU member states.

  13. Antisthenes
    February 14, 2016

    It appears that an opinion poll is showing that my thinking that not enough people are seeing through David Cameron’s farce of a renegotiation in fact are. Somewhat rather encouraging however tempered by the fact not that many would appear to care as it does not come very high on their list of priorities.

    So a mixed picture that points to more effort should be made in making people understand the importance to them personally of the pernicious effects of being in the EU. Whilst the various leave groups fight more amongst themselves as they appear to be doing than informing and educating the public to the dangers of the EU achieving that is going to be difficult. Euro-sceptics must find a way to unite.

    1. Anonymous
      February 14, 2016

      Antisthenes – Eurosceptics do NOT need to unite.

      The referendum is not about electing a party or a president.

      Anti EU views from many sources should actually be a better than anti EU views coming from only one source.

      That the Ins have been allowed to demand that only two sides can fight the referendum has been a tactical master stroke for them thus far.

      The disunity of the Out factions should not even be an issue. What on earth has it to do with the price of fish ? (Except on the scrapping of the common fisheries policy)

      1. Anonymous
        February 14, 2016

        That the Outs can disagree with themselves free from the EU straight jacket is itself something to celebrate

      2. old salt
        February 14, 2016

        The outs should not have been put in such a position by the establishment as having to have a single voice. Surely the more voices the better to reach more areas of the population.

  14. Alan
    February 14, 2016

    We already require all ferry and train companies bringing foreign passengers in to pre-check passengers. That isn’t the problem. The problem at the Calais/Dover border is the large number of cars, trucks, and coaches. Drivers are required to check their vehicles and are heavily fined if any stowaways are discovered when they get to England. Checking the vehicles is made easier if the French provide secure facilities in Calais.

    If the French were to withdraw these facilities it would certainly make things more difficult. So it gives the French an edge in any negotiations, but whether it’s significant or not I can’t tell.

    Personally I would just let people travel. I don’t think keeping people from travelling freely to and from France is worth the amount of resources we are putting into it. It unnecessarily hampers our trade and tourist industry. In fact I want to be able to travel freely to France, and come back again.

    1. zorro
      February 14, 2016

      You would be able to travel freely in the future with identity documents which you will need to have anyway to prove identity for carriage. That is minimal inconvenience. It is far easier to control the lorries before boarding ships rather than when getting off and that was one if the reasons for facing the juxtaposed controls. The French can even see that.


  15. Douglas Carter
    February 14, 2016

    ….’…no powers are coming back any time soon because the rest of the EU does not want us governing ourselves. ‘….

    …nor, it seems, does the majority of the MPs in the House of Commons?

  16. The PrangWizard
    February 14, 2016

    It is stating the obvious that since we lost control of our borders, which we must indeed regain, hundreds of thousands of people are here who should not be here, having arrived illegally, by using force, and under false pretences. It must be said, and repeated, they are not, as is usually overwhelming portrayed, victims who deserve special privileges.

    Etc ed

    1. The PrangWizard
      February 15, 2016

      I have read that Sweden is to deport 80,000 illegal immigrants, and Austria 50,000. These figures are there or thereabouts – why can I not say the UK needs to deport large numbers? Why should this be censored? Have you banned the word ‘mass’?

      Reply How many illegal migrants are there that the authorities know about and could deport?

  17. graham1946
    February 14, 2016

    It is reported that after next Friday’s jubilant celebration of Cameron’s great success, he is going to delay a Cabinet meeting until at least Monday (or maybe wait until the normal day, Thursday), so he can keep his sceptics gagged for a bit longer, whilst he gives his sycophants free rein over the air waves to spout their nonsense unencumbered.

    If this is true, it shows that he has no regard for democracy and is unfit to govern. His sceptics really must man up and challenge this either by demanding an immdediate Cabinet meeting or by ignoring this increasingly unpleasant man. If they don’t, then they will also prove how shallow and self serving they are and are also unfit for high office.

    There is absolutely no reason why the Cabinet cannot meet first thing Saturday morning and the sceptics be freed by lunch time.

    When the ‘No’ vote is won, Cameron and all his acolytes must be purged from government and not let anywhere near the negotiations. He is said to be arranging for a ‘revenge’ (he calls it unity) Cabinet if he wins, so he and his cronies must also be in no doubt that when he loses, the public will expect their resignations forthwith.

    1. zorro
      February 14, 2016

      It is better to see him in his true light……


  18. Jerry
    February 14, 2016

    “Travellers as on an airline would have to show ID documents and necessary visas and permits to enter the country they are travelling to before boarding the train , ferry or plane.”

    The Brexit groups need to tread carefully on this, I expect that many quite like the ease at which they can holiday or visit family and friends in other EU member countries, overt channel boarder controls will for many seem a regressive step (no doubt painted by BSE as hours spent waiting for passport control and customs during sweltering summer temperatures).

    Of course the reality will be no different than it was in say 1972.

    1. Anonymous
      February 14, 2016

      Jerry – I can’t honestly remember there being much of a problem travelling to the Continent prior to EU treaties.

      Package holidays to the del Sols have been going for forty years now !

      I can get to the Canada, US, Australia, Mexico… without very much problem at all.

      1. Jerry
        February 15, 2016

        @Anonymous; That was exactly my point, trouble is you need to be over 50 years old to remember it, thus plenty of much younger voters for the BSE group to put the fear into…

        Oh and package holidays to the Spanish ‘Costas’ have been going for over well 50 years, for some areas close to 60 or more years. Then of course there were those who drove by car with tent on the roof-rack or caravan behind to European destinations, often without a European motorway in sight, sometimes through tow or three countries and broader crossings, a few even crossed the Iron curtain (and no I do not mean to spy!).

        That said, on a similar point, and as I have raised before. The Brexit group also need to reassure the UK ex-pat communities living in the EU, some retired, some working – these people almost certainly have friends and family back in the UK who have votes that will be counted even if the ex-pats can’t vote.

    2. Dennis
      February 14, 2016

      Anyone travelling from the UK to any EU country must show travel documents on entry as the UK is outside Schengen and also when returning at the EU/UK border (wherever that is, an EU airport eg.) so no change there on EU exit. Just as it was in the 1950s when I tripped around Europe.

  19. Bert Young
    February 14, 2016

    The French are doing the “Brexit” campaign a service ; a little more of this news in the media will be enough to convince the undecided to vote for “Out”. The rhetoric from Bavaria was enough to make me sick ; the German threat to “cut us out completely” from our world trade was astounding ; just imagine how they would get on without their exports to us ! . Equally the support the Americans are giving for us to stay “In” is damning ; they know full well that it is NATO that the organisation of the defence of Europe relies on and not our presence in the EU .

  20. ian wragg
    February 14, 2016

    We have an “opt out” which to me indicates that at any time in the future some stupid politician can “opt in”.
    Please don’t say John that no-one is advocating this as the wet Clarke, Mandeleson wing and many fellow travellers would jump at the chance of joining.
    Also the promise of a referendum before joining is a joke as we see from our current negotiations.

  21. Richard1
    February 14, 2016

    The CEO of Easyjet argues today that air travel for UK passengers will become more expensive and less safe following Brexit. The safety argument is unclear but the cost argument is that it is the EU which has driven deregulation. Certainly deregulation has been an entirely good thing, and it is absurd that so many countries continue to subsidise loss making flag carriers, which typically operate monopolies or duopolies at inflated charges. But would we lose the benefits of this deregulation outside the EU? The best low cost carrier in my experience (superior to Easyjet in fact) is, based in and operating out of Norway, which isn’t in the EU.

    Do you have a view?

    1. zorro
      February 14, 2016

      The EU has driven deregulation?!?…… Hahahahaha


      1. Richard1
        February 14, 2016

        Well the deregulation of the European airline sector has been a result of the single market. The point I was making is some countries – eg Norway – have been a part of this without being in the EU

        Those advocating Brexit need to take arguments by such as the CEO of Eayjet very seriously, it’s no good just pooh-hooing it as happens too often in the comments here. These are the arguments the public will listen to and, if they are to be countered they need careful response.

        1. Anonymous
          February 14, 2016

          See Denis Cooper’s comment at 3.36

        2. zorro
          February 15, 2016

          On the PM’s business advisory group so no conflict of interest :-)…. We all know how good he is at picking winners and allocating state funds to certain groups….. He is really going to have to do better to convince anyone to vote for his proposals.


  22. Tad Davison
    February 14, 2016

    Today’s Sunday politics was interesting. For those in other parts of the country who may have missed the ‘East’ edition, the ex-BBC presenter, writer, and environmentalist, Tony Juniper, was extolling the virtues of the EU and why we should remain. No surprises there then.

    Mr Juniper spoke about the fantastic environmental laws the EU has given us. On these inordinately regular occasions when I hear these fatuous arguments from otherwise educated and respected figures, I often wonder if they really appreciate that were the UK once again a sovereign entity, and completely free from the EU yoke, our own parliament would then be able to make its own environmental laws. So why have them dictated to us by an expensive alien power-grabbing political construct that we don’t really need?

    Taking that a step further, Labour politicians, and indeed most of the entire Labour movement, did an about-turn in the 1980s and embraced the EU project, even though they must have known it would ultimately lead to the decimation and the emasculation of the United Kingdom itself. The reasons often cited for this damascene conversion, were that the EU had adopted Labour’s own ideas on employment laws and worker’s rights – something Labour clearly hadn’t managed to do at home through the ballot box.

    So why does Labour put so much faith in the EU to get its way, and not trust our own people to make the right choice at a general election, could it be that in pursuit of their often fanciful socialist ideology, democracy is meaningless to them and they seek to circumvent the proper methods for their own gain?

    A sovereign UK parliament could and should properly reflect the will of the British people. The laws it passes should be ones that best suit the majority. All else is secondary, but we need to guard against being overridden by back-door deals and allegiances by politicians with a hidden agenda, to a different place on the most spurious of pretexts.

    Tad Davison


    1. Anonymous
      February 14, 2016

      Tad – The EU ensures that a member country (no matter how successful it is at job creation) must subsidise domestic wages or have an enforced minimum wage in order to counter downward pressure on those wages by free movement of unskilled labour.

      No matter how good the government’s economic policies the people at the bottom will not feel the benefits because services, housing and infrastructure will never be able to accommodate the numbers competing for jobs (or welfare !)

  23. Phil_Richmond
    February 14, 2016

    Can someone please explain why the Leave campaign doesnt ask this question of the BSE quislings.
    In our current Queens lifetime we used to run the affairs of 55 countries and 1/4 of the worlds population. Why are we now not capable of making our own decisions and laws let alone anyone elses?

    When you think it about it logically is just not logical its damn right insulting!!!!!!!!!!!

    1. zorro
      February 14, 2016

      Some people might think that they don’t have the UK’s best interests at heart……


      1. Dennis
        February 14, 2016

        Perhaps we have lost the skills. In the 1950s and 60s when we were importing many people from the Indian sub continent, needed no doubt, we had 2 0r 300 years of experience there of its culture, castes, tribes, religious practices and conflicts, societal structures etc., etc. but did anyone in the Civil Service (many of whom must themselves have served in India) even have a single thought about how the UK would deal with any problems that might arise from those diverse communities? It seems not. It has taken 60 years for issues that have arisen to be slowly recognised.

        Customs of burials, marriage, divorce, polygamy, Shia/Sunni, caste discrimination, position of women etc. We can be really hopeless.

        1. Anonymous
          February 14, 2016

          Dennis “needed no doubt”

          I do doubt.

          We were in the midst of the baby boom when it was decided to do this. We had full employment. People didn’t want to drive buses because the wages were dreadful.

          Rather than put the wages up they did this.

          The hidden costs of imported bus drivers have never been acknowledged, let alone counted.

          Along with restraining wages this policy couldn’t have been better designed to dismantle British working class culture.

    2. bluedog
      February 14, 2016

      Exactly. The problem has been the total collapse in the self-confidence of the British political elite following the US veto on Anglo-French action at Suez in 1956. With the benefit of hindsight, one can see that Margaret Thatcher broke the spell of that defeatism with her successful recapture of the Falklands in 1982. Labour has now been purged of ageing wets and is reverting to a discredited stereo-type. But within the Conservative Party there still seem to be voices who deplore the sort of independent activism that Thatcher practiced. Cameron is not so much the heir to Blair but to defeatist Whigs like Howe, Hurd and of course, Maude.

Comments are closed.