David
Sumberg MEP
Date: 07/10/2006
UNCONSTITUTIONAL RIP-OFF
You may remember something called the European Constitution. A very grand plan devised by former French president, Valerie Giscard d’Estaing, to extend further the powers of Brussels over our lives and to allow even more decisions to be taken in our name by the European Union. That idea was decisively rejected a year or so ago by the people of France and Holland in national referendums and as a result pronounced to be as dead as John Cleese’s parrot.
But I have learned in my time in the European Parliament that the European Commission – the unelected civil servants who are so powerful in the politics of Europe and anxious to be even more powerful – never gives up. And so it was hardly surprising that the European Commission budget for 2007 was full of financial demands to implement bits of the constitution despite those two referendums rejecting it.
Having looked at the Commission’s spending plans for next year, it is clear that it is trying to use the 2007 budget to implement pieces of the constitution. Several new programmes and agencies which had never existed before the constitution, such as the European Migration Monitoring Centre, have been given millions of euros of taxpayers’ money – money from the same taxpayers who rejected the constitution.
Many budget items have questionable legal bases. For example, the Extended European Common Asylum System, was part of the draft constitution. Yet despite the ‘no’ votes, this project is still going ahead – parts of its budget have been increased by over 300% this year compared to last year.
By including these projects in the budget, the European Commission is deliberately bypassing the democratic process that rejected the constitution. It is really a shocking abuse of power and a shameful attempt to ignore the views of millions of people around Europe who campaigned against the constitution.
I hope MEPs will scrutinise these proposals very carefully indeed and will ensure that every single penny of extra money that was increased because of the constitution can be fully justified. After all, European taxpayers already pay far too much money into the EU as it is. But this underhand introduction of the rejected constitution is even more of a rip off. And don’t forget – it’s your money that is being misspent.
WHAT HAS THE EU DONE FOR ME?
The British Council, an excellent institution promoting British values throughout the world, and whose work I have long admired, has launched this year’s initiative inviting secondary school pupils throughout the UK to win a trip to Brussels.
Building on the success of last year’s competition, British Council Brussels has launched the competition asking students to write essays entitled ‘What has the Eu done for me?’ The idea is to raise awareness and encourage critical thinking about the EU and to stimulate debate about the impact and relevance of EU membership on their everyday lives. Essays must be no more that 800 words and should be submitted by 17th November. All information and resources are provided free of charge at www.britishcouncil.be.
The winners of last year’s competition were the first young people ever to work as accredited journalists at the European Summit. They were able to grill ministers from some of the nations of Europe, watch the news being made from the BBC and Reuters newsrooms and even attend a press conference.
So I hope North West schools will think this is a worthwhile exercise in which to participate and will have a go; I very much hope to meet a winner from the North West of England.
HOT COMPETITION
Talking of competitions, two others have recently caught my eye. I am not a golfer but I was truly amazed by the level of enthusiasm for the European victory over the United States in the Ryder Cup. In the so called ‘old days’, Britain and Ireland fought the Americans for this trophy but sometime ago, the decision was taken to make it an intercontinental affair.
I am sure the cheering crowds celebrating Europe’s success must have brought tears of joy in the offices of the European Union in Brussels. Perhaps those commissioners may now conclude that their dream of a united Europe can be achieved not by the back door introduction of the European constitution but on the golf courses – and who knows, the football grounds – of Europe!
And the other competition, in which everyone, and not just top golfers can participate, is the one to choose a new EU slogan to replace ‘Unity in Diversity’ which is apparently past its sell-by date. The Liberal Democrat leader in the European Parliament suggests ‘Unity in Adversity’ which seems to me to describe the EU perfectly…The former Conservative Cabinet Minister Lord Tebbit has proposed ‘Bigger but not Better’. What do you think? If you have any more appropriate suggestions, do let me know – after all, how often do members of the public have a chance to sum up their true feelings about Europe.