The infamous 'Sun Pledge' by David Cameron is, by now, well known and does not require repetition. What is possibly less well-known is a speech he gave just before the European elections held this year. On 26th May, in a speech entitled 'Fixing Broken Politics' David Cameron said: “A progressive reform agenda demands that we redistribute power from the EU to Britain and from judges to the people. We will therefore hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, pass a law requiring a referendum to approve any further transfers of power to the EU, negotiate the return of powers, and require far more detailed scrutiny in Parliament of EU legislation, regulation and spending.” That was a statement with no 'wriggle-room', to the extent that Mark Mardell, then BBC European Editor, remarked on his blog that “....Whether he meant it or not, it is now on the record: in government the Conservatives will hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, no 'ifs', no 'buts'.”
David Cameron has made what can only be described as a classic mistake for any negotiator, in that he has laid his cards on the table prior to any negotiations taking place. It hardly strengthens one's hand to inform those with whom you wish to negotiate that you will “not rush into some massive Euro bust-up" nor "frustrate or sabotage the operations of the European Union". It is a well-known fact also, that the agreement of the other 26 member states would be required for Cameron to succeed with his renegotiation. Ask yourself: after thirty odd years, fighting to arrive at the present stage, would the other members would agree to 'unpicking' all the treaties that have gone before? It is also undeniable that, were Cameron to succeed, other states would be queuing up to do likewise, which would result in the EU reverting to an earlier stage of its evolution; something which the Federalists in the EU will never allow to happen.
The illogicality of David Cameron's policy and statement is beyond belief. Let us look at his Sovereignty Bill which he asserts would: “make it clear that ultimate authority stays in this country, in our Parliament”, yet the Lisbon Treaty includes a Declaration confirming the primacy of EU law over national law! Considering that in any dispute arising between the EU and member states, it is the European Court of Justice, whose obligations include the promotion of European political integration, that matters, this makes Cameron's Sovereignty Bill even more meaningless. David Cameron stands further condemned by his claim 'ultimate authority stays in this country, in our Parliament'. In that case, how can he claim that membership of the European Union is good for the country? Another illogical aspect of David Cameron's statement is his insistence that there are more pressing matters requiring his attention, in particular the economic state of Britain. It seems to have escaped his attention that, since so much of our economic policy has to comply with EU regulations, he is severely constrained in what he can and cannot do. If he wishes to exceed those parameters he has no choice but to ask the EU's 'permission'. Rather an awkward position in which to find oneself – a Prime Minister denied free governance of his own sovereign nation.
Returning to the subject of the public's current cynical view of politicians and politics, it is worth mentioning the more fundamental questions both of Britain's membership of the EU and that of politicians arrogantly deciding whether or not to allow the electorate a referendum. This reveals a basic problem with the type of democracy which we in Britain have today. How can it be right that the elected dictate to the electors whether they are, or are not, entitled to remain citizens of a sovereign nation?
We, the people, have become fatalistic in that we no longer believe any of the three established political parties truly reflects our wishes. I also venture the suggestion that as the authority of our elected representatives has diminished, they are held in increasing contempt by the nation. In allowing the elected to gradually usurp power, and because the electors have not demurred, the elected have continued this process year after year. Also, for far too long, politicians have put party before country and the time has come for this pernicious process to be halted.
At the next General election all Prospective Parliamentary Candidates need to face one simple question which is whether they stand for fully-fledged absorption into and citizenship of what will be a United States of Europe, or citizenship of the sovereign United Kingdom. They can have one or the other, but not both. The choice is one of primary patriotism and loyalty and the electorate has the right to know, prior to casting their vote, where each Prospective Parliamentary Candidate's choice lies.
The foregoing only serves to underline the basis on which the Albion Alliance is campaigning and in so doing publishing a data base of all candidates so that the electorate can see where each candidate stands on the issue of European Union membership and, ultimately, who governs Britain.