Peter Bone MP: Why I believe we should leave the EU superstate

Peter Bone, MP for Wellingborough, explains why he announced yesterday that he was publicly supporting the Better Off Out campaign.

When I voted to join the European Economic Community I, and millions of other Britons, thought we were voting to create a large European free trade area. As free trade has always benefited mankind and boosted the economic wellbeing of millions and millions of people it appeared to be the right thing to do. 

Recently I asked my six year old son Thomas “what do you call something that has a flag, has a president, has a parliament, has its own currency, has its own courts, makes laws and raises billions of pounds through taxation?” Thomas’s reply was “daddy that’s easy! It’s called a country”. 

The European Union is, without doubt, a superstate. It makes laws which are imposed on British subjects which can not be altered by parliament, it takes billions of pounds each year from British tax payers and redistributes it to continental Europe, and it allows hundreds of thousands of European citizens to come into our country without any regard to the interests of the United Kingdom. At no time have the British people been asked whether they want such a superstate. The Labour government, despite their election pledge, will not even have a referendum on the European Treaty, which is merely the European Constitution re-spun.

It is my view that being in the European Union is no longer in the interests of the British people. I say that for three reasons.

First, since Labour came to power in 1997 British taxpayers have paid over a hundred billion pounds in taxation to this superstate some of which has been returned to this country through public expenditure projects decided upon by unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels. The sum of money taken is so large it is almost beyond the comprehension of most people. However, if that money had been left, either in tax payers pockets or spent on public services in this country, decided upon by elected British politicians, or a combination of the two there is no question that the British people would be better off. 

Secondly, when the government was asked how many migrants from Eastern Europe would come to this country from the new EU accession countries they said 13,000, the actual figure was over 600,000. Many of those eastern European immigrants are coming to Northamptonshire, including my constituency Wellingborough. Our local public services can not cope with this flood of migration. Our hospitals, schools, doctor’s surgeries, dentists, police and roads are under enormous pressure at present. However, the government is planning to impose 52,000 additional houses in north Northamptonshire over the next few years, up to a third of these are going to be for migrants from the European Union. The infrastructure of Northamptonshire will not be able to cope. If we were out of the European Union a third of these homes would not need to be built. 

Thirdly, over the last hundred years so many British people have lost their lives defending this country against foreign invasion. They were fighting to maintain the freedom we have in this country to rule ourselves, they were fighting for democracy. Yet over the last few years, step-by-step, we have been ceding to the European Union the powers to govern ourselves. It is fundamentally wrong that another state can impose laws on this country. The Westminster parliament should be sovereign and this will not and can not happen whilst we are part of the European Union. 

I have no doubt that we will be better off out of the European Union.

Related link: Last June Philip Hollobone explained his decision to support 'Better Off Out'

Comments

[Simon Newman]

Well said. It's a legitimate position (though I disagree with it) to seek to merge the UK into the 'peaceful empire', as Barroso called it. But 'in Europe, not run by Europe' is a contradiction in terms. The EU was always designed to become a State, not a free-trade zone. This teleology is embedded into its structures and cannot be altered.

"I, and millions of other Britons, thought we were voting to create a large European free trade area"

British politicians really need to start paying attention to the preambles of EU treaties and directives, where the purpose is explained. Continental jurists know that the important bit is the preamble, not the articles.

[Ken Stevens]

Utterly and absolutely agree with article.
Love Europe; Hate EU.

[Paul Oakley]

Welcome aboard, Peter! By my reckoning this makes you the 9th Conservative MP or MEP to sign up to BOO. Let's hope we reach critical mass on this as soon as possible so that withdrawal becomes party policy and is subsequently implemented under a Tory government.

[michael mcgoughmichael]

A most welcome endorsement for the 'Better Off Out' campaign.I note that Peter is a Chartered Accountant and has worked in the real world.

[MHDH]

I agree 100%, but Dave won't be very happy with you saying it.

[Tony Makara]

The EEC bears no resemblence to the political organization known as the EU today. The problems really began with enlargement. Once we went past twelve members our own role diminished and the Eurocracy developed a dynamic of its own. Its also interesting to look at unemployment figures for the UK since 1973. When our trade was largly to the commonwealth we prospered, since that shifted we have been in decline.

[Teck]

MHDH [Oct 09, 2007 at 09:23], I'm not so sure David Cameron would not ultimately support cogent reasons for exiting the EU. I believe that he is, as a potential future leader, prudently assessing the depth of public feeling and parliamentary trends.

[Jack W]

Well here's a pretty sight, the election off and some Conservative MP throws an EU sized spanner (metric or imperial) in the works.

I wonder if this statement would have found its way into Mr Bone's election address ? and the implication for jobs, trade and wages for his constituents.

Not that Mr.Bone has a strong record on wages .... what was it ??? boasting some years ago of paying a £1 an hour to his employees. Mind you, perhaps if we leave the EU we'll end up as a third world economy and it'll be back to the good old days of a quid for 60 minutes.

School kids up the chinmey anyone ??

[Chad Noble]

Well done Peter and of course well done to everyone at BOO for an excellent, positive, non-partisan campaign.

Is it now time for eu withdrawalists to get their heads together and collectively determine a knock-out eye-catching project that cannot currently be afforded and provided, but will be provided using the savings made by ending our massive EU contributions?

This would make membership/withdrawal a simple economic decision for the British public that measurably improves their individual lives, and give them a real understanding of what these costs deprive them of, and how EU membership is a roadblock to providing this service, far better than talks of billions, squillions, zillions saved etc.

[Common Sense]

Tempting as it is to issue forth a clarion call to escape the bondage of the European Union...

...the British people are not yet ready to march out the door. They are uncomfortable in the EU, they are eyeing the exit wondering if they should make for it but they are fearful of what lies outside.

What is required now is not emotionally satisfying posturing or "tell the truth and shame the devil"-style catharsis. Our duty is to engage in the long, laborious task of persuasion. The public needs to be intellectually convinced that life outside the EU would be better and more prosperous.

[Chris Palmer]

I think that point three by Peter Bone is particularly important. Across two world wars and numerous conflicts, British people have fought and died to keep this country free from external rule and tyranny. If we continue down the path of ever closer union, the sacrifice of past men and women will seem at times to have have been for nothing and a complete waste.

Hopefully this might encourage a few more people to sign the Better off Out campaign.

[IRJMilne]

When John Redwood supports Better Off Out, I'll support it. As it is, enough able and intelligent people support continued membership that I think it's worth giving the Tory party one last chance to do something with the EU.

The red tape is a nuisance, but the main issue is sovereignty.

[Matt Wright]

A principled stand that I strongly respect.

Matt

[Paul Oakley]

Nice to see JackW @ 9.57 recycling Ted Heath's scare stories of 22 years ago. Rather than try to make peoples' flesh creep about the financial "benefits" of the EU he might be better off reading the IEA/Minford/Mahambare/Nowell analysis. Membership has been a disaster for the UK economy.

[Simon Newman]

Common Sense:
"The public needs to be intellectually convinced that life outside the EU would be better and more prosperous."

People need to understand what membership of the EU is doing, right now, to our system of laws and liberties. There has already been huge degradation of (eg) our legal system, but this is rarely linked to its source in EU membership and the acquis communitaire.

[Andrew Lilico]

Unlike all other (Conservative) commenters on the board as I begin, I do not agree with this article. In my view we can have our cake and eat it as well.

I agree that there is a Single European State under construction, and that the UK should not seek absorption into this SES. I even agree that the EEC/EC/EU has always had some of the characteristics of a classical empire. Where I part company, though, is in the ideas (a) that we have not so far benefitted from being in the EU

[activist]

Jack W is a Europhile supporter of Gordon Brown from "political betting" and not a Conservative. His response to Peter must be seen through that prism.

[englandism]

Another reason Brown is agin a public vote:

The SNP wishes to be an independent nation within the umbrella of the EU.

The SNP is still on the honeymoon that led Brown, in part, to cancel the general election.

For the same reason he will resist a referendum because the SNP will produce a YES majority in Scotland in the face of a NO majority in England.

The SNP will then have a mandate to separate from England.

[HF]

Donal made the excellent point yesterday about embracing a big tent of centre right supporters.

BOO is one such activity which has opportunities and dangers.

The problem is who owns the issue of this. Donal rightly says it needs a Leader. It could also do with some supporters and maybe a Leader could pull in the Tebbits etc and give them something useful to do.

Roger Helms might play such a role, if he could tone down his public criticisms of the party. Edward Leigh is another. Or what about IDS?

[Michael David Rock]

Good call, 'activist'. It is typical of a statist to come and heckle as soon as a Conservative mentions Europe; Peter has put forward a cogent, sensible argument that many of us agree with.
I have long maintained that we will be better off out: the future is global free trade not an insular, protectionist EU state.

[The Huntsman]

Given the distaste the party has shown for those who have had the courage to take this stand, Peter Bone's declaration is to be welcomed, applauded and supported.

The EU is an essentially socialist construct that was designed to deal with the political wreckage left after the Second World War. It has minimal relevance to the global markets of the 21st century and competitive trading conditions that now exist. It is basically an elaborate and very expensive means of transferring the hard-earned wealth of the northern European nations to inefficient goat farmers in the Greek mountains and of handing over to a load of foreign politicians power over our Parliament the extent of which some dictators can only dream.

It may be that the EU graciously gives back some of our money, but it only does so on terms that it approves. It is high time we took back power over the wealth we generate and spend it in the way that we deem fit for he benefit of our people.

Now we have two out of three here in East Northamptonshire, we will have to ensure the election of Louise Bagshawe in Corby and to persuade her to join our cause. Then this small corner of the Realm will be able to hold aloft the torch of national independence which Europhiles as so desperate to snuff out. Whither we lead others will surely follow.

[Andrew Lilico]

Sorry. Got cut off in my prime. To continue:

Where I part company, though, is in the ideas (a) that we have not so far benefitted from being in the EU; and (b) that the only options are absorption or withdrawal.

I believe that we benefit very significantly from EU membership. Economically, through our ability to persuade our partners to reduce (to their own benefit) barriers to trade and other commerce with us to a degree they would never have contemplated without the EU. Culturally, because the EU has facilitated much more profound intercourse between our peoples than would have occurred otherwise, and has opened up new vistas to us in the East. The EU has also been a splendid mechanism of foreign aid, providing a model and a hope for the post-Communist transition states that has certainly served to promote peace, order, liberal democracy, and free commerce there to a degree that would not have occurred without the EU (consider, for example, the plight of post-Communist transition states of the former Soviet Union further east, beyond the EU's reach).

If (as other EU members will) we do not join the euro, and if we stay out of other state-building schemes such as harmonization of criminal law, then we can take the benefits of EU membership without the cost of absorption into the SES.

Nothing is for ever, and perhaps one day we will indeed want to leave - or even want to enter into the SES. But neither of these options is necessary for now. For the moment we have the excellent position of being able to benefit from EU membership whilst retaining our self-determination.

The key task for us today is not to leave the EU. It is to make good use of our self-determination, promoting our constitutional monarchy, our adversarial legal system, our Westminster Parliament, our independent judiciary, our common law, and so on. At the moment, we are abusing our self-determination to dismantle those features of our state that make us special and good. The EU did not make us abolish the right to silence, introduce retrospective criminal law, cripple our Upper Chamber, unbalance the Union, reverse the presumption of innocence in a wide range of cases, remove the right to face one's accusers in a range of cases, introduce long-term detainment without trial, introduce house arrest without trial, sanction evidence based on torture, and so on. The EU will not make us introduce ID cards. These affronts are self-inflicted. Our priority should not be leaving the EU. It should be using our self-determination to enhance, not diminish, the virtues of our State.

[passing leftie]

The EU forces us to privatise our industries, decrease - "harmonise" - our direct taxation, enforces competition, prevents us from subsidising our own industries and implementing a truly socialist program. The new treaty is even worse - it imposes unfettered free market competition. Just look at the Post Office. The free market is like a religion in the EU. So, the imposition of the treaty can only help the right with what the French call "Anglo-Saxon" policies, and I'm against it. I'm surprised and pleased you lot are though.

[Bexie]

Even the Europeans dont really like the new EU. (Should that be nuEU like nuLab?). It imposes all sorts of regulation from an unelected and rather remote body, led by a team comprised largely of failed politicians, mostly with some question over their propriety. This is not the model of good government.

If we are to stay in then the beaurocracy should answer to the EU parliament, otherwise we should really get out.

[Yet Another Anon]

I believe that he is, as a potential future leader, prudently assessing the depth of public feeling and parliamentary trends
And sticking to In Europe but not run by Europe. The Conservative Party and Labour Party have both put on shows of Euroscepticism when it suits them, but always signed up to more. So far the only party leader of the 3 main parties while party leader or since to advocate leaving the EEC\EU since the UK's membership was Michael Foot. I suspect that Margaret Thatcher from about 1990 began to become favourable for leaving after having actually been one of it's main proponents. IDS probably has a similar view.

So long as the UK remains in the EU it will go on as it has been with constant disagreeements and grand talk of reform by UK parties and virtually nothing will happen.

I cannot see the EU introducing the sorts of reforms allowing member states to introduce Capital Punishment or easing trade restrictions. How about ending the free movement of labour within the EU and allowing member states to decide this - the UK wants Trading agreements not some kind of Liberal Empire and there is no sign that any of the 3 main parties is actually going to do anything significant towards this and indeed probably lurch further headlong into the monster.

[Lindsay Jenkins]

Congratulations to Peter Bone on an article of straight commonsense.

By the end of this year this country will have paid almost £214 billion gross or £66 billion net to the EC budget. Since we joined the then EEC we have accumulated a trade deficit of £360 billion. Over regulation costs another £26 billion each year.

Those are eye-watering numbers. I could go on at length on the costs to this country - and there are no benefits. No wonder no government has dared to embark on a cost benefit analysis.

But above all what price freedom.

A warm welcome Peter to Better Off Out.

[Cllr Tony Sharp (Wellingborough)]

I think Andrew that the downsides too frequently outweigh the positives you have listed.

Why can we not have the trading links and free movement of goods without the need for overbearing political control from unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels/Strasbourg? The trade off is not sufficiently beneficial.

It is understandable that many people resent the loss of parliamentary sovereignty that has accompanied the EU project. Decisions should be made in the interests of this country by representatives elected in this country to serve in this country. There is too high a risk of decisions being taken by the EU that are not in our interests.

Surely it also makes more sense for the money we give to the EU to be kept in the UK and spent on important projects, without the huge administration cost incurred through the EU mechanism that gives us some of our money back.

I think Peter's principled position is based on years of experience of the EU. No one can say the EU has not been given a fair crack of the whip. If we find the party's position on repatriating powers from the EU and increasing accountability, transparency and competitiveness cannot be achieved then maybe we will see more people supporting calls to withdraw from the EU.

[Teck Khong]

Hi Andrew [Lilico; Oct 09, 2007 at 11:14], what you say broadly represents the ideals of a grand union with defined autonomies but the gulf between hopes and the realities is sadly the reason for disenchantment.

Furthermore, the suggestion that we ought to assert our primacy (or at least our entitlements) runs counter to the principle of equity - a founding but largely utopian principle of the Union.

In the end, the "half-in, half-out" default position with a "as-long-as-we-do-not-lose-big-time" philosophy is I believe unsustainable.

Best wishes!

[Cllr Keith Standring]

As a BOO activist since its launch by The Freedom Association, I am naturally delighted to welcome Peter Bone, MP to our ranks, especially as he is also a fellow-Conservative.

Our British traditions and freedoms were not annihilated by two World Wars - but then our nation was united against an external enemy. We are now in grave danger of losing any semblance of national and parliamentary sovereignty through the subversion of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats in the EU, aided and abetted by some British politicians whose desire for self-aggrandizement far exceeds their patriotism.

By publicly supporting BOO, Peter has put the British people before himself. His constituents in Wellingborough have a fine MP, and I'm confident he will be joined by other MP's in making this stand for Britain.

[Jack W]

Activist @ 10.38. I am neither a europhile or a supporter of Gordon Brown.

I am a euro pragmatist and social and economic liberal.

Wouldn't it be about right that just as the Tories start to appear to get their act together up pops the Boneheaded tendency in the party doing more than a passable impression of a UKipper on speed !!!!

I suppose that's fine it you want to attract the Farage wing into the fold but the Conservatives would lose a huge number of potential supporters at the other end.

Personally I would not consider voting Conservative again if withdrawl from the EU was the party policy or indeed for a candidate who espoused such views.

[Battered Motorist]

Tech, MHDH and others.

David Cameron said in his 2005 leadership campaign that sovereignty was important. (And so was 'consistency').

We should hold him to his word. You are either in the EU and under the tender mercies of the European Court and the acquis communautaire legal ratchet, or out as a sovereign nation.

Under international law, if we quit the EU tomorrow, free trade and movement of capital would be safeguarded as they are now. So let's be positive about a post-EU future.

[John Wilkin]

To Jack W - "Mind you, perhaps if we leave the EU we'll end up as a third world economy"

Switzerland, Norway and Iceland don't exactly look as if they're suffering outside of the EU, do they?

[Bexie]

Ummm I think we should also look at what we gain from Europe; free trade, free movement, right to work anywhere in Europe without a visa at the least.

Lets deal with the problem and not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Chuck out the quangocracy in Brussels and prosecute the commissioners if they cannot account for every bean that they have received. Then lets have a close look at what we want to keep.

[Lindsay Jenkins]

To add to John Wilkin's list in reply to Jack W - "...if we leave the EU we'll end up as a third world economy" - Hong Kong and Shanghai contrast starkly with the EU socialist state.

[Teck]

With due respect, [Jack W Oct 09, 2007 at 13:15], it should be borne in mind that the historical roots of the EU were only economic expediencies but it is now evolving into a federalist entity with core elements that are at odds with our democratic system and responding to changes should therefore be cognisant of our requirements, not the other way round.

Battered Motorist [Oct 09, 2007 at 13:18] and like-minded people have probably reached the end of their tolerance of what is perceived as EU centrifugal governance, while on the other hand, Andrew Lilico et al plead for a stand in meeting the challenges with assertiveness and centripetal influencing.

A referendum calls in all these and other intellectual processes, but unfortunately for practical purposes, it is reduced to a "yes-no" vote, hence the angst.

[Jack W]

CHILDISH COMMENT OVERWRITTEN BY THE EDITOR.

[Chad Noble]

"Personally I would not consider voting Conservative again if withdrawl from the EU was the party policy"

How about if Cameron officially repositioned the Tory party as neither europhile nor eurosceptic but (at a party level) euroneutral by welcoming people from both sides of the divide, united in the common, democratic policy of offering the people a fairly funded and worded referendum on membership?

Cameron could then happily personally campaign for continued membership himself alongside the reformists and integrationists but would end all the internal fighting on the issue by creating a common bond; the right of the people to decide.

This way Cameron would really be offering a broad church to reflect the full range of opinion within the UK and to offer the UK clear direction for a generation.

[Jack W]

COMMENT OVERWRITTEN.

[Jack W]

COMMENT OVERRIDDEN FOR IRRELEVANCE!

[Jack W]

Lindsay/Teck/Chad.

Thank you for your replies however I find it difficult to respond to your fairly put points without being accused of being "childish" or knowing where the "irrelevance" threshold now lies.

In principal I favour the old Conservative line in that I do not favour referendums as I believe that it deminishes the role and sovereignty of parliament. You will recall that Conservative governments have never before offered a referendum on European matters. Voters who wish to withdraw from the EU should cast their ballot for UKIP.

[Mark Wallace]

Bexie: "Ummm I think we should also look at what we gain from Europe; free trade, free movement, right to work anywhere in Europe without a visa at the least."

All things that can be gained from membership of EFTA, which does not involve the vast costs, sacrifice of sovereignty and so on...

[Teck]

Jack W [Oct 09, 2007 at 16:34], thank you too for your valued viewpoint, but my belief is that a referendum has been promised, that the original agreement has been varied to such an extent that sovereignty is compromised, and that government has not obtained through a full parliamentary debate the implications and strategy of dealing with such a major constitutional change.

There are other lesser reasons too.

[Henry Mayhew - Ukipper]

Thank you Mr Bone for your very valuable piece with which I, and virtually all, posters are in full agreement.

I sense it is going to be a lot of fun to campaign on this issue (for once) since, with The Sun's support, critical mass has been reached. We are entitled to cash Mr Blair's promise of a referendum on the document which has just been proved by the select committee to be the constitution in all but name.

[Bexie]

Teck, fair point. I am merely trying to challange to see what we gain out of Europe. Clearly the corrupt quangocracy (corrupt in that they cannot account for their spending) in Brussels has to go.

[Cllr Paul V. Greenall, West Lancashire DC]

Dear Peter,

Well done, I agree with every word.

I am also a supporter of "BOO" because I think we have been conned into the EU and because reform of this institution is a pipedream. Mainland Europeans appear to want unity but Britain does not, so we should leave and let them get on with it. If only other Conservative who think this way would come out and say so...!

[Moral minority]

As an early supporter of Better Off Out, I welcome Peter's decision to support the campaign. Given the Tory Whips' hostility to BOO and TFA, it is a bold and courageous decision.

Hopefully more MPs will realise that EU reform is impossible and support the campaign too. William Hague's slogan is out of date. If you are in the EU, you are run by the EU.

Defeating the new constitutional treaty via a referendum is only the first battle to be fought in the war to regain our national sovereignty and Parliamentary democracy.

[Stuart Guppy]

An excellent article, because it is the truth. Thank you, Mr. Bone. Public feeling is moving well in this direction. We need M.P.s like youself who will stand up for Britain, not pursue the New Labour line of wrecking it.

[Peter Christensen]

I love Europe but hate the concept of being governed by people who I had no part in electing. Britain should follow such countries as Norway. Opt out of the EU super state but remain a free trading partner within the EEA.
We are better off out!!