Emily Davison must be spinning in her grave at the action of female pro EU MP's

  • 0 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4128
  • +75/-0

Of all the escapades the suffragettes did to achieve votes for women the most tragic was that of Emily Davison. She tried to catch the reins of the Kings horse, Anmer at the Epsom Derby on 4th June 2013. She was knocked over and died 4 days later. All in the cause of Votes for Women which was granted some 5 years later.

Emily Davison must be spinning in her grave at the action of female and male pro-EU MP’s and Lords who are campaigning to stay in the EU. This is because they are campaigning to lose their vote. Not just for their own vote, they are campaigning for everyone, including women, to lose their vote. What is the primary purpose of your vote? It is to hire and fire the government that makes your laws in Westminster. However, being in the EU completely denies you the opportunity to hire and fire your government as you are governed by unelected faceless bureaucrats and Commissioners in Brussels. The MEP’s you vote for to sit in the Brussels parliament do not make the EU’s laws. Our so called “MP’s” in Westminster do not have any say in the laws being passed in Brussels as EU laws over-ride UK laws and we are forced to accept them.

So, all the pro-EU MP’s, male and female must totally and utterly despise all those who vote for them so as to lose their vote. Surely, if they are stupid enough to vote to lose their vote then they do not deserve a vote anyway? The pro-EU female MP’s must surely therefore be traitors to their sex by denying women the chance to have a meaningful vote on their government! This is despite the long campaign by the women who so bravely campaigned for Votes for Women, like Emily Davison, who gave her life for the cause. Not only the suffragists and suffragettes but millions of men and women from Britain and the Commonwealth who gave their lives in world wars to keep Britain free and independent of foreign rule. It is worth pointing out that although the suffragists campaigned peacefully the suffragettes had to resort to civil disobedience to achieve their aim of votes for women. This was probably because they were denied the right to vote for MP’s who supported their cause. The same situation all voters in the UK are now in, due to the UK parliament being totally sub-servient to the EU.

But pro-EU MP’s must surely be traitors to their constituents as well! Why do they want them to have to pay up to £1,000/year extra on their household bills because of being in the EU’s customs union? Have they no sympathy for single mothers, the unemployed and the lowest paid workers in their constituency’s and the country? Why make them all pay extra on their groceries because of EU imposed tariffs and make them give a percentage of the VAT we all have to pay direct to the EU? Why not give an extra £10 billion/year to the NHS, our armed forces, the police and fire services? No chance, as these MP’s would rather throw that money away forever as nett contributions to the EU budget. Clearly, their overriding mission to destroy the UK as an independent, sovereign and democratic nation in order to make the UK a vassal state of the EU completely over-rides the political and economic costs involved.

Furthermore, these MP’s must also be a traitor to their country. Not only have they, as MP’s, made an oath of allegiance to the Queen whom they clearly do not recognise as the UK’s Head of State, they also want UK laws, trade and foreign policy amongst many other issues all to be dictated by foreigners in the EU. They must also want their constituents to
be overwhelmed with immigrants from the 350 million in the EU who all have the legal right to live in the UK and for our fishing industry to be further decimated by EU fishing boats.

So why do all the pro-EU MP’s in Westminster and those in the unelected House of Lords want the UK to stay in the EU? They claim that the UK’s economy and our trade will suffer after Brexit. But they quote no figures to support their feeble contentions. So, let me quote some factual figures which they dare not mention as they destroy their case for staying in.

1 The economy will suffer because of Brexit

Why? Being in the EU commits the UK to vast financial liabilities such as;

a) Annual budgetary contributions and other payments to the EU over which we have no absolute control whatsoever. Currently these are approximately £10 billion/annum for the budget

Since 1973 the UK has given our competitors in the EU over £400 billion cash of UK taxpayers money in nett budgetary contributions. This all had to be borrowed and the interest on this amount must currently cost the UK about £10 billion/annum. The nett budgetary contributions amount to about 20% of our national debt, which is approaching £2 trillion. In addition, the UK’s VAT contribution and customs duties paid to the EU amount to about another £5 billion/annum.

b) Extra cost of up to about £1,000/year on our housekeeping due to tariffs imposed by the EU on imported goods and the EU’s demands that we buy goods from the EU at inflated prices.

This has had disastrous effects on the poorer countries of the world and the Commonwealth which did so much for the UK in the last two world, and other wars. For example, the New Zealand lamb and butter exports to the UK and sugar exports from the West Indies were badly affected by EU demands that the UK imported these items from the EU instead, thus increasing our cost of living. In addition, UK households paid about £2.5 billion/annum for VAT contributions and EU taxes on non-EU imports into the UK.

c) Current cost to the UK economy of being in the EU estimated to be in the region of £185 billion/annum (Prof Tim Congdon, “How much does the European Union cost Britain”). This is an overhead cost on the whole UK economy, not just the 12% or so involved in trade with the EU.

This figure can be used to show that since 1973 being in the EEC/EU could have cost the UK a current total of over £8 trillion. Whatever the precise cost is it is obviously well past the time the UK made a bonfire of un-needed EU regulations and directives. Only possible after a full and unfettered Brexit!

d) In his report, “The UK’s liabilities to the financial mechanisms of the EU” published by the Bruges Group, Bob Lyddon, of Lyddon Consulting Services Ltd., concludes that:

“The net effect (of leaving the EU) would be a need to refinance GBP30 billion via the UK Debt Management Office, thus increasing the UK’s direct national debt whilst
releasing the UK from contractual commitments up EUR 1.23 trillion and the inferred obligation to offer “extraordinary support” of an unlimited amount above that.” (My emphasis.)

“The case for leaving the EU immediately to avoid heavy payments to the EU is therefore overwhelming.”

e) In addition, leaving the EU will avoid the next generation of UK taxpayers probably having to help finance the €30++ trillion tax liability for future EU civil service pensions which have to be paid out of current taxes.

The European Central Bank commissioned a report by the Research Center for Generational Contracts at Freiburg University in 2009. This showed that the 17 EU countries investigated had almost 30 trillion euros, (equivalent to1 million euros/UK taxpayer), of projected obligations to their existing populations. As the UK generally pays about 16% of the EU’s total contributions this implies that the UK would be exposed to contributing a minimum 160,000 euros for each UK taxpayer over their working life to support the EU’s pension liability.

Germany accounted for 7.6 trillion euros and France 6.7 trillion euros of the liabilities, authors Christoph Mueller, Bernd Raffelhueschen and Olaf Weddige said in the report. The largest pension liabilities in %GDP can be found in France (362.2%), Poland (361.1%), Austria (359.9%) and Germany (329.6%). This was before the massive influx of immigrants into Germany and the EU generally.

The UK had one of the lowest pensions in the EU and the lowest liability of the 18 countries examined at 91.2%. Despite this, the UK pensionable age is likely to rise to 68 from 60 in a few years. What does that say about the pension prospects for countries like France, Poland, Austria and Germany with pension liabilities which are over 3 times their GDP?

f) The level of toxic debt of €1.06 trillion within the EU banking system is sizeable equating to 5.4 percent of the entire EU’s total loans - a figure more than treble that of other large banking sectors such as Japan and the US.

g) The level of government debt to GDP ratio for the Eurozone is nearly 89%. For Greece it is 177%, for Italy and Portugal it is over 130%. With “friends” like these to support who needs enemies?

The UK has a national debt rapidly approaching £2 trillion, yet the UK is regarded as the financial “milch cow” of the EU to be squeezed until the final drop is expended.

h) The level of unemployment in the Eurozone is very high, particularly for the young. This is not a good indicator for stability in the region for the future. Germany has 3.6% unemployment and Greece has a youth unemployment rate of 48%. Anyone might think that a single currency and a single interest rate might not be appropriate! However, the pro-EU elements would argue that only foolish anti-EU people would think that as they don’t understand the value of ‘the project’, which is to destroy the UK as a sovereign, independent and democratic nation and make the UK a vassal region of the EU.

2 Brexit will damage our trade. Why?

a) In 2002, 58% of UK exports went to the EU and 59% of UK imports came from the EU

b) In 2016, 45% of UK exports went to the EU and 54% of UK imports came from the EU

c) Hence the EU is a diminishing export market in % terms for the UK, our exports to the EU having dropped 14% in 14 years.

d) On a world scale the EU’s share of the worlds GDP has dropped from 31.6% in 1980 to 22.2% in 2016.

e) Hence, after a full Brexit the UK will have national access to the Commonwealth and the rest of the worlds (ROW) markets which have grown from 69.4% to 77.8% of the worlds GDP

f) In 1961 UK exports to the British Commonwealth were 43% of the total. 16.7% to the then Common market and 13.1% to EFTA.

g) In 2002 58% of UK exports went to the EU and only about 10% to the Commonwealth. So did this dramatic change in our trading patterns represent a great improvement in our fortunes? Not a bit of it! Since 1973 trading with the EEC/EU has currently cost the UK an accumulated DEFICIT (LOSS) of well over £1 trillion.

h) However, over the period 1973 to 2012 the UK made an accumulated SURPLUS (PROFIT) of £245 billion in trade with the ROW using WTO rules where necessary.

i) Clearly trade is a complicated issue and we import goods from the EU to make goods to export back to the EU and the ROW and vice versa. Nevertheless, IF the figures were reversed and we had made a £1 trillion surplus trading with the EU, the pro-EU fanatics would have been screaming this incessantly from the roof tops. The FACT is that as it is a £1 trillion LOSS they never mention the figures!

3) Furthermore, in his report “Where’s the insider advantage?” Civitas, 2015, Michael Burrage concluded:

There is no case that EU membership is good for UK exports or
foreign direct investment
* The fact that the UK is the second largest net contributor to the EU’s budget clearly does not grant us any favours when it comes to exports to the EU

* Thanks to the EU the UK has not had a balance of trade surplus in goods since 1981, after just 8 years of joining the EEC.

* Furthermore, out of the EU, the UK must be in a much stronger exporting position with the rest of the world (ROW) without the enormous £185 billion/annum overhead cost of being in the EU.

Hence there is a very good case that OUTSIDE the EU the UK would also increase its exports to the EU!

4) Burrage listed the top 35 fastest growing exporters of goods to the 11 founding members of the EU’s single market between 1993 and 2011. The UK comes 28th on the list. Only 9 countries above the UK had a trade deal with the EU. It therefore proves beyond any doubt that;

* it is NOT necessary to be a member of the EU to access the EU single market and export successfully to the EU

* it is NOT necessary to have a trade agreement with the EU to export successfully to the EU and,

* the USA, China and Russia are the top three largest non-EU trading partners of the EU, none of which have trade agreements with the EU or membership in the EU single market. They trade based on the rules of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

* Hence the UK does NOT NEED TO BE IN THE EU to trade with the EU or with other countries.

Hence, there are clearly no advantages in staying in the EU’s customs union, the single market or even the EU itself. The proponents that demand we stay in should be made to justify their reasons for staying in, but these are clearly non-existent. Hence they are all promoting a lost cause. Their only justification must be that staying in the EU and making the UK a vassal state of the EU is a cause worth all the political and economic costs of being in the EU. Luckily the majority of voters in the referendum did not agree with them!

J Wraith

« Last Edit: June 27, 2018, 07:29:15 PM by the leveller »

Share this topic...
In a forum
In a site/blog

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk