What we are not being told by our Government

  • 0 Replies
  • 872 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4115
  • +75/-0
What we are not being told by our Government
« on: August 28, 2014, 09:43:24 PM »
The paragraph below is included in one of those articles, (Which I touched on then not realising the full weight of one Alec Salmond) yet our government has not even mentioned the Commonwealth and what such a break-up of the once United Kingdom would mean to them. “++++++++++++++++++++++

Because money is the only issue. Will it pay to go or shall we be better off staying. Nothing about ‘union’ ‘brotherhood’, ‘like or dislike’, it is pounds sterling.

F
====================================================
 28 August 2014 21:08

This is well worth reading as it may have profound implications for England
etc. Anne is a retired magistrate and does an awful lot of research on the
subject of the EU. Replies from those in the know welcome.
  Di.
====================================================

From Anne
Thursday, 28 August 2014, 12:10

In attachment are two articles [one attached, the other linked below - MG] regarding what is happening TODAY re Scotland.  Although my article does not cover all that is going on, I do believe we have to fight to keep the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland indeed "UNITED".  The paragraph below is included in one of those articles, (Which I touched on then not realising the full weight of one Alec Salmond) yet our government has not even mentioned the Commonwealth and what such a break-up of the once United Kingdom would mean to them.  Would it be the end of the Commonwealth?   All of this certainly touches on our present and future Monarchy.   However, I send, and I know you are all busy people, it is however-your future-not mine-to either fight to keep our United Kingdom together for yourselves and your future Generations, or you lose it.  Anne

==================================================================
If Scotland breaks away and is no longer in the EU, and as at the time of writing, this seems to be the case, surely the same would apply to England?  The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland would no longer exist.  The Act of Union was also a Treaty and a Treaty that was ratified.   Article 11 of the Treaty of Union 1707 embodies the substance of the Act of Settlement of 1701. Destroy the Union and it affects all the Members of the Commonwealth.    We then come to the problem of whether Treaties signed by the then Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and all the Treaties (Lodged with the Vienna Convention on the laws of Treaties- in the United Nations) have ratified as a United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland would still 'stand', even though it would no longer exist and as such, would WE perhaps no longer be in the European Union?   Just hoping!


https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/274477/scotland_analysis_borders_citizenship.pdf



 
Scots Wha Hae!   A Scottish Break away From the UK? 12.2.2013


There are many reasons to think deeply before the people of Scotland (and the people of the rest of the UK) decide to break up the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.  Firstly, I am aware that the British Governments have done what some might regard as ghastly dirty deeds in the past and in the recent past too.  Yet having written that I sincerely hope the Scottish people remain within the United Kingdom.  To remain within the United Kingdom is surely far better than going it alone in the European Union.


What was made very clear to the Scottish Parliament on the afternoon of Tuesday 22nd May 2001 when members from the EU visited the Scottish Parliament when their Convenor (Hugh Henry) said, “This is a unique meeting for us—it is a joint meeting with a delegation of our colleagues from the Committee of the Regions led by Manfred Dammeyer”¹.  All became clear to the Members that afternoon when Mr Dammeyer stating that, as far they –the people of Scotland- were concerned, Scotland was and is a nation and Country.  However, Mr Dammeyer made very clear when he said,  (simultaneous interpretation) “We have to respect that Scotland is a nation but, at the European level and in the European discussion, Scotland is like a region”.


I state here that as far as the EU is concerned, the Country and Nation of “Scotland” is a REGION of the European Union, confirmed also, as indeed is Wales, and as we all know now since this Coalition Government has been in power, the Nation and Country of ENGLAND has been divided, by courtesy of Mr CAMERON and the EU, into nine EU REGIONS (Eventually to be Governed directly via the EU’s Committee of the Regions).   

There is no doubt that there would have been no need for the “Act of Union”, a Treaty between two separate Nations/Countries, in fact Kingdoms, that had decided to be united, a coming together to be ruled by one Parliament situated in England, and that this was to be for all time, if Article XX11 of that Treaty was not included or entrenched within it. There is no doubt at all the Act of Union, was and is entrenched. (Protected) it was indeed a TREATY and although at the time of writing the 1706 Treaty, it was insecure up until the Treaty had been ratified. It was ratified.

The Treaty and Acts of Union are the very foundation stones of the Common Law Constitution of this Kingdom and Parliament, for not only was it the end of an independent sovereign Nation and Country of Scotland, it was the birth of the then sovereign Nation and people’s of Great Britain as well as the “Parliament of Great Britain” as we know it today, the Great British Parliament and the United Kingdom of Great Britain. These words are to be found in those ancient documents.

I also point to Volume 10 of Halsbury’ s Statutes on constitutional law, where it is found that the Treaty (between England and Scotland (1706) is embodied in statute and is therefore still part of the law of the United Kingdom.

The words in the Act of Union are (1706) Article 1, “That the two Kingdoms of Scotland and England shall upon the first day of May next ensuing the date thereof and forever after be United into one Kingdom by the name of Great Britain. And that

the Ensigns Armorial of the said United Kingdom be such as her Majesty shall appoint and the Crosses of St Andrew and St George be conjoined in such a manner as Her Majesty shall think fit and used in all Flags Banners Standards and Ensigns both at Sea and Land.”

Article 3, “That the United Kingdom of Great Britain be represented by one and the same Parliament to be styled the Parliament of Great Britain”.

Article 5, (Proof of the Act of Union being a TREATY) “That all ships or vessels belonging to her Majesties Subjects of Scotland at the time of Ratifying the Treaty of Union of the two Kingdoms in the Parliament of Scotland though foreign built be deemed and pass as ships of the build of Great Britain:….”

ArticleXV1 in case Scotland ever wanted to ‘go it alone’ as regards the EU Single currency) “That from and after the Union the Coin shall be of the same standard and value throughout the United Kingdom as now in England….”

Article XV11 “That from and after the Union the same weights and Measures…”

Article XX11 Perhaps the most important of Articles, for without this particular Article the Union between England and Scotland would not have come about. The two Kingdoms would have remained separate for all time (unless one was conquered by another, in a war). “That by virtue of this Treaty, Of the Peers of Scotland at the time of the Union Sixteen shall be the number to sit and vote in the House of Lords, and Forty-five the number of representatives of Scotland in the House of Commons of the Parliament of Great Britain) (and that when Her Majesty, her Heirs or Successors, shall declare her or their pleasure for holding the first or any subsequent Parliament of Great Britain, until the Parliament of Great Britain shall make further provision therein, a Writ do issue under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom, directed to the Privi Council of Scotland, commanding them to cause sixteen Peers, who are to sit in the House of Lords, to be summoned to Parliament, and forty-five Members to be elected to sit in the House of Commons of the Parliament of Great Britain, according to the Agreement of this Treaty, in such a Manner as by an Act of this Treaty, in such a Manner as by an Act of this present Session of the Parliament of Scotland is or shall be settled; which Act is hereby declared valid as if it were a Part of, and engrossed in this Treaty.

When temporary MP’s or members of Government want to fill (stuff it full to the top) the House of Lords with elected Peers, it becomes obvious that either they have no understanding of this, their own Country’s Constitution, or have absolutely no respect, or allegiance to it or their own Common Law Constitution.

Lord Slynn of Hadley (Privileges Committee-Second Report). “The more complex question is whether the Bill, if enacted, would violate Article XX11 of a Treaty which is an entrenched part of the constitution of the United Kingdom. Whether there was a Treaty is a matter of interesting debate amongst academic Lawyers. For my part, I would accept that there was an international treaty between England and Scotland (as it has often been called in the past), but since neither state has existed as such since 1707 there is no party to the treaty which could enforce it. But the argument goes further---i.e. that whether or not there was a treaty in international

law and whether or not it is capable of being, in some ways, still in force, the provisions of Article XX11 constitute a fundamental law of the constitution which is entrenched in the sense that Parliament cannot legislate in violation of it”. And I say “amen” to that. 

Lord Hope of Craighead also reinforced that same argument when he repeated the words of Sir Hersch Lauterpacht’s observation in Oppenheim’s Peace, 8th edition 155-156: “A state ceases to be an international person when it ceases to exist…By voluntarily merging into another state, a state loses all its independences and becomes a mere part of another”. There is time for reflection there, for what happened to this Country when Governments signed all those EU Treaties?

Lord Slynn goes on to relate Professor Smith, "First, they constituted a treaty in international law between two sovereign states—the treaty being concluded not by the Parliaments, which did not exercise the prerogative treaty-making powers, but by Anne, Queen of Scotland, with Anne, Queen of England. This treaty, however, was executed on May 1, 1707, and can no longer be invoked qua treaty. Secondly, the respective Acts of the pre-Union Parliaments operated as ordinary legislation binding the subjects within the jurisdictions for which these Parliaments could competently legislate. Thirdly, the Union Agreement took effect as a skeletal, but nonetheless fundamental, written constitution for the new Kingdom of Great Britain when it came into being."

Later on Lord Craighead put forward in his argument towards the abolishing of the hereditary peers, “The conclusion which must be drawn from these various enactments, as Mr. Hodge Q.C. for the Government pointed out, is that the right of the peers of Scotland to sit and vote in the House now depends entirely upon section 4 of the Peerage Act 1963, and that Article XXII of each of the two Acts which constituted the Union Agreement has been repealed. Mr. Keen for Lord Gray submitted that it was ultra vires of Parliament to repeal Article XXII. But I do not think that it is open to us in this Committee to take that view, for the following reasons. First, there is the doctrine of sovereignty of Parliament. Whatever view a court might form on the matter, as to which I express no opinion, I do not think that it is open to this Committee to question the extent and application of the doctrine of sovereignty. Secondly, for the reasons already given, I consider that article XXII lacks the character of fundamental law, which is an essential prerequisite for the argument that Parliament went out with its powers when it enacted these repeals”. Needless to say, I too believe that it was ultra vires of Parliament to repeal Article XX11, and this fact should not be ignored.   

A very cleaver person, I am sure could unravel the proceedings for and on behalf of the people and country of Scotland should they so have a mind to. I add that the Treaty and Act of Union also affects the Act of Settlement and that is another important matter altogether and it must never be ignored or eyes taken off the ball. Unless of course, all want this great Country to just become Regions of the EU in which case, there is absolutely no need for either Houses of Parliament.

Art 48) Where it was intended in the Articles of the Acts of Union to entrench provisions, against change in the future, the draftsman took care to use very clear words. The particular examples are—referring to the Scottish Act of Union—Article 1

(to unite the Kingdoms "forever"), Article II (to secure the protestant succession at all times in the future), Etc. Yet Article XXII the most important of articles in that entrenched TREATY was repealed.. See below.  Methinks they over-stepped the mark!

If Scotland breaks away and is no longer in the EU, and as at the time of writing, this seems to be the case, surely the same would apply to England?  The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland would no longer exist.  The Act of Union was also a Treaty and a Treaty that was ratified.   Article 11 of the Treaty of Union 1707 embodies the substance of the Act of Settlement of 1701. Destroy the Union and it affects all the Members of the Commonwealth.    We then come to the problem of whether Treaties signed by the then Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and all the Treaties (Lodged with the Vienna Convention on the laws of Treaties- in the United Nations) have ratified as a United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland would still 'stand', even though it would no longer exist and as such, would WE perhaps no longer be in the European Union?   Just hoping!

From Hansard 22 Jan 2013 : Column 189  Jacob Rees-Mogg: “We are discussing what may be the most important constitutional issue to which the House has ever turned its mind, namely, who shall be our sovereign? Who shall be eligible to receive perhaps the greatest office in the world? Who shall be the King or Queen of England?

When the Bill that became the Act of Settlement was debated, it spent six days in Committee. The allocation of time motion allows us two days in which to treat this Bill as if it were anti-terrorism legislation, which seems a particularly inopportune comparison given that it relates to matters that could not be further removed from that type of activity. As far as I am aware, the only constitutional Bill that has been treated to such a small amount of time—or, rather, an even smaller amount—is the Bill that became His Majesty’s Declaration of Abdication Act 1936, which, I believe, completed its passage in the House of Commons in under a minute; but that, too, is not a happy precedent.

And it is here that just one change in our Constitutional Document affect so many long standing Documents and all because of the EU’s Equality Act”.

Ian Paisley (North Antrim) (DUP):”Is it the hon. Gentleman’s understanding, as it is mine, that significant subsequent legislative changes will be required to no fewer than nine Acts of Parliament—the Bill of Rights, the Act of Settlement, the Union with Scotland Act 1706, the Coronation Oath Act 1688, the Princess Sophia’s Precedence Act 1711, the Royal Marriages Act 1772, the Union with Ireland Act 1800, the Accession Declaration Act 1910 and the Regency Act 1937—and that we require more time to explore the implications and impact of those changes?”

I am aware that it was a British (Not just ENGLISH) Government that has actually signed and ratified the EU treaties that can expressly and deliberately repeal the European Communities Act 1972 or deliberately abrogated the treaties although there would still be problems in International law.  For those that want an English Parliament and the break up of the United Kingdom, should think very carefully should they wish to remain IN the EU, because if the United Kingdom breaks up, you can bet your bottom dollar that the EU will break up too, for it too is in a very dodgy 

state at the moment and there is a great possibility that it may break up especially if there is a great push for deeper integration under the German presidency as is proposed.

From EU OBSERVER   8/1/07 Scottish independence theory raises EU questions.  Mark Beunderman thinks Scotland would not automatically become a member of the European Union if it became independent, the European Commission has said. The SNP on its website claims that "Scotland is already in the European Union and this will remain the case after independence."

Now I come to some-thing that disturbed me very much, which made me ashamed to be English, but write it I will.   On the 23rd of March 1999 Scotland handed over jurisdiction of 6,000 square miles of North Sea to Westminster. The remarkable thing about this transaction is the fact that it occurred without the knowledge or consent of the people of Scotland.  In fact it was a Labour government led by Tony Blair that ordered this bizarre act of treachery towards the people of Scotland and it was allegedly, a senior Scottish Labour politician, Henry McLeish that sanctioned it.  What is even worse is the fact that the whole affair was conducted  allegedly in secret at Committee level denying the House of Commons or the Scottish Parliament an opportunity to properly debate the issue.  To their eternal shame Tam Dalyell (Labour), John McAllion (Scottish Labour) and Sir Robert Smith (Scottish Liberal Democrats) sat on this committee and allowed this act to be carried out without authority from the Scottish electorate or the Scottish Parliament. More on: http://www.oilofscotland.org/scottish_politics.html


Was it all in preparedness of the coming separation of Scotland from the rest of the UK?  Any Oil fields involved? Towards the Coming of the EU’s Motorway in the Sea?  In the Scots Parliament debate of 26 April 2000, John Home Robertson, MSP, tabled a motion stating:  “That the Parliament notes the terms of the report by the Rural Affairs Committee, The impact of the Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundaries Order 1999 (SP paper 42), in particular its dissatisfaction and concern about the level of consultation carried out prior to the introduction of the boundaries order, that the introduction of a boundaries order appears not to have identified any inconsistency with the Civil Jurisdiction (Offshore Activities) Order 1987, and that the amount of fishing activity in the disputed area does not appear to have influenced the Order, and further notes the Committee’s recommendation that the Secretary of State for Scotland should either introduce a new, revised Order, or support a Bill calling for a revised boundary proposed in the House of Commons by Archy Kirkwood MP.”—[Scottish Parliament Official Report, 26 April 2000; c. 10.]  Archy Kirkwood is now Baron Kirkwood of Kirkhope.    Anne Palmer. 12.2.2013.

¹Scottish Parliament May 2001 debate

http://archive.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/historic/europe/or-01/eu01-0702.htm

The EU Bill and Parliamentary Sovereignty Part 1 See page 25 re referendums.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmeuleg/633/633i.pdf

The EU Bill and Parliamentary Sovereignty Part 2.  2010/11

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmeuleg/633ii/633.pdf

Follow the debate on Royal Marriages and alleged Changes to our Constitution

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm130122/debtext/130122-0002.htm

Oil off Scotland

http://www.oilofscotland.org/mccronereport.pdf

Scroll down and read the whole sordid lot.

http://www.oilofscotland.org/scottish_politics.html

The Debate re Scottish Peers and there removal

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199899/ldselect/ldprivi/108i/10811.htm

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199899/ldselect/ldprivi/108i/10811.htm

The case put by Lord Gray can be found on http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199899/ldselect/ldprivi/108i/10810.htm

Certain Judgement

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/ldselect/ldcref/125/125we11.htm

Enactments repealed-Peerage Acts 1963

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1963/48/schedule/2/enacted?view=plain+extent

AND

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1963/48/enacted?view=plain

Union with England Act 1707

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1707/7

Representative Peers

http://www.cracroftspeerage.co.uk/online/content/Representatative%20Peers.htm

The realm of Scotland

http://realmofscotland.com/scolandpage.aspx?Cat=11&menu=The%20Treaty%20of%20Union,%20analysis

MAP of the Scottish Borders in the Sea.

http://www.electricscotland.com/history/articles/TNBS.pdf

Scotland’s Oil

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_Scotland%27s_oil

With maps of the sea.

http://www.oilofscotland.org/scottish_politics.html

APPENDIX 1 Statement of Issues agreed between the Lord Gray and Her Majesty's Government 7.  In addressing the primary issue, it will or may be necessary to Consider—(i)  The role the Committee may properly perform in relation to the reference;(ii)  Whether the Parliament of Scotland transferred to the Parliament of Great Britain the power to repeal the Articles of the Act of Union of 1707;(iii)  Whether in any event the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland may repeal the Articles of the Act of Union of 1707;(iv)  Whether the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has repealed Article XXII of the Act of Union of 1707;(v)  Whether the repeal or purported repeal of; (a)  Article XXII of the Union with England Act 1707 by the Statute Law Revision (Scotland) Act 1906, the Peerage Act 1963 and the Statute Law Revision (Scotland) Act 1964; (b)  Article XXII of the Union with Scotland Act 1706 by the Statute Law Revision Act 1867, the Peerage Act 1963 and the Statute Law Repeals Act 1993, is determinative of the primary issue.http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199899/ldselect/ldprivi/108i/10809.htm Those that play with fire will one day surely get burnt.

« Last Edit: August 28, 2014, 11:48:28 PM by the leveller »

 
Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)


SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk