Britannia Radio

19 August 2009 More Humbug from a Feeble European Parliament   For five years I made it plain to all in the European Parliament who would listen – and the majority who tried to pretend I wasn’t there – that I wished to see the United Kingdom out of the EU altogether. So an invitation to an award ceremony and reception to receive a European Parliament medal was weird, to say the least.   It happened all the same.  As a retiring MEP I had to be treated like everyone else.  (If only!  But more of that anon.)    The ruling bureaucracy could not bring itself to recognise the absurdity of issuing such an invitation to me.  So they did.  My reply to the German then president of the parliament, Hans-Gert Pottering, read:   “It beggars belief that you should assume such an invitation is acceptable.                  “Can you please tell me the cost of this event and the so-called ‘medals’.  (I cannot imagine you are meeting the costs from your personal funds.)   “I am certain the several million taxpayer constituents in south-east England will want to know.   “For the last five years it has been a point of principle of mine not to accept invitations sent to me as a member of the European Parliament.  A tiny handful of exceptions have been made only when the direct and specific interests of my constituents would be served by my attendance.   “I was elected to protect the interests of the people of south-east England, to do my best to hold to account the unelected bureaucrats imposing so-called ‘laws’ on the UK, to communicate what I learned back to the people of SE England, and to hasten the day when Britain leaves the EU, takes its billions with it, and once again governs itself as a truly sovereign nation.   “It will happen.  The only question remaining is ‘when?’   “If you understand anything at all about the majority British view of the EP you will already know I have not the slightest intention of accepting any such invitation as this.  You embarrass yourself by issuing it, and oblige me to spell out yet again my profound and total opposition to British membership of the EU.   “As I told you in May [a speech in the chamber], you cannot be master in someone else’s house.   “Ashley Mote”   It will come as no surprise that my demand to know who much this nonsense cost has been ignored.  After all, I’m no longer there to press the question.   Meanwhile, back in the UK, I then received a personal letter from Pottering which studiously ignored my rejection of his invitation.  Instead, it said amongst other things, “I should like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation for the way you have performed your duties.  Through your work you have made a significant contribution and taken on political responsibility at an important time….By means of your efforts you have successfully carried out the task conferred on you by our (sic) fellow citizens…Please allow me to express my heartfelt thanks to you.”   These words have an unsubtle and perhaps unintended edge to them.  It worries me that one of my more powerful political opponents should sign such demonstrable nonsense, especially when he uses the deliberately inclusive word “our” rather than “your” fellow citizens.    Is he trying to suggest I spoke for anyone other than the voters of SE England?  If so, I must disabuse him, because most certainly I did not.  Or is he saying he thinks he won and the letter is actually a form of sarcasm.  From a German?  I doubt it.    When the new parliament assembled on 13 July that very same Mr Pottering watched troops assembled from France, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg  - the so-called Eurocorp garrison - march into the EP’s forecourt in Strasbourg and raise the ring of thorns banner whilst an orchestra and choir performed the Ode to Joy anthem.    (Both the banner and the anthem were ostentatiously dropped from the Lisbon Treaty to help pretend that it was different from the rejected Constitutional Treaty, only to be reinstated quietly as official EU paraphernalia via a parliamentary vote at the very end of the last session.)   Defending this display of Lilliputian military might, Pottering claimed “Soldiers are part of the defence of our human rights, democracy and the law.  We want a European Union that is strong because no country alone can defend its interests.”  No comment necessary! Later he urged members to “unite to freeze anti-Europeans (sic) out of the decision-making process for the next five years.”  We can safely assume he meant ‘anti-European Union’, but the mistake was of course deliberate.   So much for the charade that is the European Parliament, and its role as an illusion of accountable parliamentary democracy at vast expense to British taxpayers.    Which brings us neatly to the latest evidence of the futility of the European Parliament.       The Barroso farce   The European Parliament’s opposition to the re-appointment of Mr Barroso as the president of the European Commission has been overruled by the European Council, which in turn is made up of the nominees of member governments.  The bureaucrats win again.   MEPs – the new lot, that is – had started the process of sacking Barroso, a former Portuguese prime minister.  Many EU-enthusiasts complain bitterly that he is no Prodi or Delors.  For them, he did a poor job over the last five years.  They wanted to force him out.   Personally, so long as we remain stuck with the EU, my own view is that his reappointment might be a relatively good thing.  Yes we will inevitably have more problems, but nothing like those we might encounter if another Delors or Prodi were wielding the draconian powers of the Lisbon Treaty.        Better the devil you know – an unconvincing bumbler.   Just for once the feebleness of the European Parliament might – perhaps – have worked slightly in our favour. To respond to, or comment on this Email, please email ashley.mote@btconnect.com Click www.ashleymote.co.uk to visit the site now.