« A good day to bury bad news | Main | 'Hug-a-hoodie' sentiments get backing from Lord Tebbit »

Comments

Well said Mr Burt. As I said before, reaching this compromise now means that the party can begin to focus on the real issues that the 'man down the pub' and the 'mother on the school run' care about rather than indulging in endless navel-gazing about our European policy.

Why are you sorry that our link with the EPP is ending Alistair?I t is a very genuine question as I am not aware of any benefits to Britain our membership has brought.Please enlighten me.
Thank you
Malcolm

I'm a hard line Eurosceptic who is determined to see the UK out of the EU. That requires discipline. Here's the key quote -

"All Tory candidates at the next European Election will be required to commit to leaving the EPP and joining the new group."

So the federalists will have to choose between the Tory Party and the EPP. That's great.

The problem now is that a few undisciplined Eurosceptic MEPs may yet snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. If they try, as individuals, to leave the EPP today they will rule themselves out as candidates in 2009. That would demonstrate childishness, impatience and lack of strategic nous in equal measure.

Idiotic comments like "Dan Hannan, cometh the hour, cometh the man" are almost calculated to incite Eurosceptics into committing tactical blunders.

Don't play into the hands of Beazley, Jackson, Patten, Hezza and the federalist rump. Bide your time.

When is the party going to realise that the surveys of young people in this country (under 35s) repeatedly show that they want nothing to do with any more European integration. The only "narrow sect" within the Conservative Party is the same group as is found in other political parties - baby boomers who think that all solutions are found in European federalism, regardless of democracy. Please please listen to the younger generation. Leaving the EU is not an extreme position - it is in tune with the country's future.

"Please please listen to the younger generation. Leaving the EU is not an extreme position - it is in tune with the country's future"
I'm part of said younger generation, and i do indeed support withdrawal from the EU. I do however believe we would be foolish to leave, but not have some form of a free trade agreement with ll EU countries. British companies have used the EU's lifting of trade barriers to spread their business far and wide instead of having their operations soley in Britain. It would be rash and foolish to believe that withdrawal from the EU in a graceful manner could be achieved overnight. After all we all know what a spontaneous withdrawal from the ERM did to our economy (I was only 4 at the time admittedly!).

...and before anyone says our withdrawal from the ERM is not a fair comparison, I have to agree. It is however the only recent comparison that we have available, I imagine the effects would be much the same as if suddenly New York declared independence from the United States.

So in short, this 'solution' means that the Eurosceptics are annoyed over a broken pledge, there will be no time before the next general election to form a sensible grouping to show a committment to eu reform is feasible and workable, and Blair will be free to simply say that a Tory Government will doom the UK to the fringes of Europe if elected.

The party had a chance to spend the next 3 years showing that EU reform is not just possible but sensible and achieveable. It has blown it.

Now people will be voting at the next election in the face of Labour spin about the Tories damaging us in 'Europe' if they get in.

First 'hug a hoodie' now another open goal for Labour.

Chris I think you'll find that leaving the ERM proved extremely beneficial to the ecnomy.
Any of you pro EPP ers care to talk about any benefits being in the EPP brings?

"Peace in 2009" almost rhymes with "in our time".

A worthless peace of paper if the group is being formed after the elections.

"(1) the immediate formation of a new "Movement for European Reform, dedicated to the ideals of a more modern, open, flexible and decentralised European Union""

Reform means one thing to Mrs Merkel, another to the Czechs and another to the Tories. Bottom line, the EU can only be reformed in a direction inimicable to British interests.


As an aside, David Davis must have had a wry smile on his face when this news was revealed, considering the scorn that he was greeted with after presenting this as his position on the EPP-ED during last year's leadership contest.

Bear in mind that the next General Election is likely to be at the same time as the next European Election (June 2009). Shame it won't be dealt with by then

Chad

"First 'hug a hoodie' now another open goal for Labour."

Lord Tebbit has backed Cameron on hoodies, see breaking news on Telegraph online for details.

Hague's position is totally unacceptable. He's informing the MEP's that if they quit the EPP and carry out Cameron's policy, they will be deselected and not able to stand again at the next election.

So there you have it. Hague is lining up behind the bully boys to crush Roger Helmer's brave stand against EU corruption. And he's trying to muzzle many others. Hague is the lowest form of life that democracy has been unfortunate enough ever to encounter.

He parades as a conservative, as a democrat, as a charming chap, as a believer in the rule of law, and a fairminded individual who would not tolerate corruption. He seems to be the kind who would face down a bully or a thief and fight for justice.

In truth he is none of thse things. He is giving succour to the corrupt. He is helping the voices of freedom and democracy to be crushed. He is a fraudster as great as any other our nation has known.

The MEP's affected cannot allow this unbeleievably insipid individual to stand in freedom's way. They must put their careers on the line. If Hague says there must be casualties, and that means Roger Helmer at the very least, they must all come out in sympathy with his courageous position. Hague's looking for a risk-free easy life for himself. He hasn't given a thought to the position of others.

If we allow the bullies to win now, we will never be able to stand proud as free people again. Hague is the ultimate front man - apparently reasonable charming well-spoken, but he's a quisling, a waste of space. It is now that freedom requires people to fight. Not next week. Not in a month's time. Not some time in the future. Now . Now. Now. Hannan must put his neck on the line. Someone has to take a risk. Now is not the time for backing down.

The voice of freedom must never be silenced.


A bit OTT, William, I think.

We're leaving the EPP in a controlled and orderly fashion. What good news!

Not one of you commentators seems to have any concern about the really scandalous alliance - that of the British Conservative MPs in the EDG Group of the Council of Europe. There the Tories have elected as their leader Mikhael Margelov, the head of the Russian Federation Council's international relations committee and cheerleader for Vladimir Putin. Mr Margelov is quoted yesterday in the Tiomes attacking the UK Ambassador to Russia, Anthony Brenton for supporting a democracy conference in Moscow which was broken up by the pro-Putin youth organisation. Curious that nobody on this site seems to care in the least about this alliance.

Comments by C Jackson MEP

"“Cameron needs to learn a lot more about EU politics. This is a very considerable climb down,” she insisted.

“It will not be possible to pull out of the EPP-ED in 2009 if it has not proved possible now.”

"

http://www.eupolitix.com/EN/News/200607/eaa67ca4-93b6-4ba7-ac20-218aeb0b935e.htm

While this isn't ideal it's better than nothing. If Cameron fails to leave in 2009 then he knows he'll be in severe trouble. I'm not the most patient of people but I don't think we're going to suffer significantly from remaining in the EPP for 3 more years.

Chad, the benefits of remaining in the EPP:

1.) If we want to be treated as a mainstream centre-right party then we should work with our allies and not against them.

2.) Since 2004 we have been free to vote and speak on issues as we please and not in not necessarily in agreement with our EPP-ED partners.

3.) Britain is far more Eurosceptic than most other EU countries, especially the EU-15, the Labour party are more sceptical than many of the EPP-ED parties. The party groupings are not based on relative stance re: integration.

4.) As has become apparent over the past six months the only option outside of the EPP-ED are isolation or joining with either racist, homophobic, fascist or lunatic fringe parties.

5.) A far more positive approach would be to agree to work with the ODS in the confines of the EPP-ED to promote a EU that is effective and promotes decision making where it is most effective, at the lowest level, true subsidiarity.

No doubt Hannan and the H-block will be jumping up and down in hysterics at the moment. If they are not prepared to work in the group they pledged to remain a part of then their choice is clear.

You report "William Hague told me that the Tories will leave the EPP at the 2009 elections, whatever the Czechs do." What does this mean? Only last month, he said virtually the same on Any Questions about the here and now. If the Conservatives cannot form a group in 2009 - with by then at least six nationalities required, and barrier almost certainly raised even higher - are they saying they will force their MEPs to sit as non-inscrits? The will force the same revolt from the MEPs, whoever they are, once elected, simply because no elected politician wants to sit as a totally marginal figure devoid of any power.

So what benefits has EPP membership brought to Britain Daniel Webster.Can you think of any specific examples?

During hustings Cameron told us that the EEP leaving date would be up to his Foreign Secretary. The Foreign Secretary has given us a date. It’s a date more distant than many of you would like, but a date nevertheless.

Now let's look at why we should or shouldn't leave the EEP-ED. I refer you to their priorities to 2009 document.

Please let me know which bits you disagree with.

That the EEP-ED is allegedly full of federalists is not a good enough reason to prefer isolation. For example, the Conservative Party has many members who follow a religion, and many who believe that all religion is bunkum. Some even believe it’s dangerous bunkum. Despite such fundamental differences, we vote side by side.

So now the pledge of 'months not years' has become 'years not months'!
We now know that Cameron's pledges are not to be taken seriously and that is an unwelcome situation for a leader who has only recently taken over.
How can we believe anything he says between now and the next election?

"Please let me know which bits you disagree with."

Strengthening the concept of European Citizenship and supporting the EU Constitution for starters.

It strikes me that leaving EPP would by no means imply that Conservative MEPs had to vote contrary to them when they were actually doing the right thing. Much as is current policy with T.Blair's lot.

Most of this document is 'motherhood and apple pie' but how does it work in practice?They promise to 'fight fraud' and when Roger Helmer tries to do that he's stripped of the whip!

Willet failed to defend the EPP fudge Cameron calls a fulfilled pledge on the Daily Politics.

I would have a good laugh about this, but this is supposed to be a serious political party...

Hang about ... Tory MEPs can be expected to tolerate the euro-federalist beliefs of some of their present colleagues within the EPP, but they couldn't tolerate the rather old-fashioned beliefs about human sexuality held by some of their potential colleagues in another group? It's more important to pick allies with modern views on sexuality, rather than allies who agree that both our country, and their country, should continue to exist rather than being absorbed in a European Federation?

Danel Webster writes that the EPP is " a group of parties that overall are closely aligned to the Conservative vision?. It's nothing of the sort. It's a group of quasi Social Democrats - not right wing at all. Allies???? Opponents!

Cameron has broken his word just like all the other politicos. Trash!

Come on people! Smell the coffee...
This EPP thing is a total anorak issue of no importance to most people other than Tory hacks. Please, elt's concentrate on what matters - Labour sleaze, allegations of corruption and the accepted incompetence at the heart of government. David Cameron's fulfilling his pledge, let's move on.

Strengthening the concept of European Citizenship and supporting the EU Constitution for starters.

It does talk with an assumption that the Constitution would be ratified, but that's not support. EEP-ED membership does nothing to stop the Conservative Party from campaigning for "No" in the vote that counts, i.e. our referendum (should it ever happen).

The concepts of EU Citizenship laid out in III.3 are hardly sufficient to get this bound-up over.

I don't understand. Why can we leave in 2009 and not now?

Those Stepfords who say 'how wise' can maybe explain to this dumbo why it is wise to leave in 2009 and not now.

Presumably other DC pledges will only be fulfilled in the next-but-one-parliament.

What a cynical, dishonest, stupid way to behave.

If Conservatives are to be silenced for three more years inside the corrupt democracy-crushing EPP, just long enough for the EU to complete the End of Parliament Enabling Laws, and the break-up of Britain into regions, then Conservatives may as well pack up and go home.

We're history, dodos, useless beings of no consequence, who when we had the chance to fight for our freedom, did not do so. Every day that goes by from now on we are collectively guilty of destroying the democratic inheritance given to us by those who came before.

Someone must be prepared to fight on, simply by saying what we think in the European Parliament, and refuse to be muzzled any longer. That's all we are asking - the right to speak in a Parliament and say what we believe is right, and what we believe to be wrong. If that is too much to ask, then we must refuse to be bound.

Let Hague carry out his threats to deselect our MEP's in three years time. By then we're dead meat anyway. The deselected MEP's can all come to Westminster as MP's, and they will be replaced by 5 times their number at the Euro elections if the Party ensures that we get anti-EPP candidates. Someone has to take a risk for freedom, to put their neck on the line. Helmer's shown the way. Is he the only one?

Here is a press release from the Leader of the EPP-ED Group in the european Parliament, Herr Pöttering from CDU, Germany

http://www.epp-ed.org/press/showPR.asp?PRControlDocTypeID=1&PRControlID=5122&PRContentID=9174&PRContentLg=en


13/07/2006: EPP, Conservatives - Hans-Gert Poettering on statement by David Cameron and Mirek Topolánek on possible formation of a new European Group in 2009

The Chairman of the EPP-ED Group, Hans-Gert Poettering, has seen detailed media reports on a statement from David Cameron, leader of the British Conservatives together with Mirek Topolánek, leader of the Czech ODS Party on the possible formation of a new political group in the European Parliament following the European elections in June 2009.

"It is regrettable that this statement does not recognise the substantial and positive contribution by a large majority of Conservative and ODS MEPs within the EPP-ED Group", Poettering said. Conservative MEPs will now remain in the Group essentially based on the fact that the leadership of the Conservative Party in London has not succeeded in finding other parties to co-operate with in the European Parliament. This means the agreement between the Conservative Party and the EPP-ED Group, dating back to before European elections in 2004 on Group membership for the parliamentary term to 2009, will be kept in the letter if not in the spirit.

Poettering criticized the statement as being an unnecessary and not very helpful. Nobody can forecast today what the political situation will look like three years from now.

The EPP-ED Chairman confirmed his conviction that a long term cooperation between the EPP and the ED (British Conservatives plus Czech ODS) parts of the Group is not only in the interest of the centre right parties but also in the interest of Britain and the Czech Republic.

Further information from:
Katrin Ruhrmann, Tel, +32 475 493357
or R. A. Fitzhenry, Tel. +32 475 493356

Background:

British Conservative MEPs were first admitted to the EPP Group in 1992. Because the MEPs in question are not elected from an EPP member party list, the Group decides, on request by the MEPs after each European election, on their membership of the Group.

In 1999 the Group changed its name to the EPP-ED (European Democrats) Group to accommodate the Conservative MEPs in the Group. Before the European elections in 2004 the EPP-ED Group changed its statutes to take into account the special situation of allied MEPs (European Democrats). They were specifically granted the right to have "their independent view on constitutional and institutional matters regarding the future of Europe ". In addition the ED part of the Group is entitled to one of the positions of Vice-Chairmen of the Group.

The EPP-ED Group, currently with 263 MEPs, would remain the biggest group in the Parliament independently of the British Conservatives (27 MEPs) and the Czech ODS (9 MEPs), ahead of the Socialist group (200 MEPs).

It is the trust thing.

Blair is not trusted because he promises things he can't deliver. NHS etc.

Cameron made one real policy stance during his campaign, one that Davis wouldn't, and he has failed to deliver.

Like Blair would have done, he has given us a fudge and a way off target.

I expect better. I don't want another Blair. If this party can't offer an alternative to the failure of New Labour I'll look elsewhere.

Normally I'm a loyal Cameroon, but this fudge is an ocean-going, gold plated, 5-star disaster.

It is a disaster for the party, for Cameron and the country. We should've sat on our own. Now we're stuck in a grouping that knows we hate it, DC has broken a clear cast-iron promise, and the EU can go another 3 years without a (non-nutter) eurosceptic grouping trying to reform it.

The EU is an abhorrent organisation and if it cant be reformed into a free-trade area, as I briefly hoped it could with an eurosceptic grouping, then we should leave. But Cameron hasn't even got the balls to unilaterally leave the EPP.

You can spin this whatever way you want but this is a betrayal of an unequivocal undertaking. And why should anybody believe that there's not going to be another betrayal in 2009?

Oh dear! why do any of us bother to pay a sub or even turn out on election days.

On sober reflection, my analysis: I would have preferred an immediate exit, and I think it could have been made to work, but I can see the reasons not to. The actual wording of pledges matters, and a date wasn't specified, so it is a valid loophole. On the other hand, not only is a date now solidly specified, but if D.C. thinks he's jumped out of the frying pan he'll soon notice he's landed in the fire. An unequivocal pledge on such a very long time span - three whole years - leaves him both a hostage to fortune, and exposed to continual euro-federalist pressure in the interim. Just for timescale comparison, three years ago the Americans had only just finished taking Iraq.


It's certainly wrong to say the pledge has now been fulfilled. David Cameron has taken a step towards fulfilling the pledge.

Membership of the EPP may well have brought the UK specific benefits in terms of agreements and directives. However, I feel the greatest benefits are those which cannot be so easily measured, such a sense of shared values with parties from other nations. If we are going to remain in Brussels, which I think we should, we gain nothing from striking out on our own.

"Months, not years" was what Cameron said on the Today program in 2005, quoted by Andrew Neill on the Daily Politics today. You can watch the prog online here, it is about 20 mins into the prog.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/the_daily_politics/5176774.stm

2009 is NOT months.

Just look what Karl Von Wogau MEP, a leading light of the EPP, is saying about a European Army.

Is this one of the benefits of membership of the EPP?

It is good timing. By 2009 UKIP (beneficial only to Labour) will have disappeared and the Conservative party will have the opportunity to make a proper eurosceptic group that does not include either the lunatics UKIP is currently allied to or the other lunatics who sit as non-aligned members. Three short years and we get our way.

I am disappointed that William seems to be ready to compromise and accept delay. With a man who advocates hugging Hoodies as the Leader I think I will be looking for a Party to support that Stands by its principles without delay!!

Still waiting for anyone to put forward benefits of the Conservative MEPs sitting with the EPP that have been gained for Britain.Can't you Europhiles think of ANYTHING?!! I'll even take something that can't be measured Jessica!

Is there an award for delusional post of the week?

what would be the point Chad, you'd keep winning it and not give anyone else a chance.

Odd how you always whinge about people being 'personal' - what's the matter not enough posters on UKIPHome?

Malcolm, the effects of withdrawal from the ERM may have eventually been positive, but the immediate ones were negative enough so as to lose us our reputation for economic competence.

As for your question as to the benefit of the EPP I believe that we have more office space, some extra funding and receive chairmanships to some commitees due to us being members of a large group. I'm not a fan of the EPP, but I believe they are the only benefits.

Credibility? Courage? Trustworthiness?

All of these were on the line, and Cameron has been found wanting in all respects. A sad, sad day for the Party, but a good one for Labour. They are now able to ask "This man breaks his one firm pledge to his own party; how can you possibly put any trust in any promises he makes to the general public?"

There is another straw in the wind that I haven't seen picked up on. It is the title "Movement for European Reform". Speaking for myself, I reject completely the notion that Europe = EU. However, conflating the two is the mental frame that europhiles desperately want to project. The intention here is to merge the two very different concepts of the peoples and countries of the continent of Europe, with the ever-tightening hand of the EU federalist stranglehold. Constructing the parameters of an issue in this way - setting the terms of the debate - is called 'framing' and it is a frame that I'm really unhappy to see the Party (hopefully unconsciously) accepting. Conflating the two is useful to EU-enthusiasts, as it then makes sense to say things like 'Britain cannot leave Europe' (of course it physically can't). Keeping the two concepts separate is vital to critical and lucid discussion on this issue.

We should reject this misleading and deceptive frame unequivocally. If we mean that we intend (for now, at least) to attempt to reform the political construct - the European Union - into the Common Market that we were publicly promised by Heath, then we should be clear about that. A 'Movement for EU Reform', now that I could accept, as decent and honest.

I fear a 'Movement for European Reform' is at least so much more spin and fudge - not to mention being an insult to Norway and Switzerland, whom I believe are good European neighbours.

On the other hand, 'fulfilling the pledge' was itself just so much so much spin and fudge, so why change now?

We lost our reputation for economic competence when we joined the ERM Chris not when we were forced out.1990-2 were very hard years,1993-97 were excellent.
I admit the party did badly 1993-7 but that was inspite of the economy not because of it.I'm more interested in Britain being successful than only thinking of party advantage all the time.
Kingbongo,the most delusional post I've received today was from conservatives.com which stated that DC had 'fulfilled' his pledge on the EPP when quite patently he hasn't.As you know I'm not often a critic of the leadership but today I'm very,very disappointed.Sadly Chad was right and Tim,myself and many others who took Camerons' pledge at face value were wrong.

By 2009 UKIP (beneficial only to Labour) will have disappeared

Guys,
I've just spent 90 mins on the train back from the City to the country reading and rereading this manifesto.

Far from extinction, there is an exciting and very real change that UKIP is about to embrace a geniunely progressive small government agenda with David Campbell Bannerman as leader.

Just take a read. Not what you expected is it?

Looks like Campbell Bannerman is following in the footsteps of his relative. This reads like a Liberal manifesto with a smattering of Euroscepticism. Blood will out!

Cameron has promised to leave the EPP in 2009 but there is no guarantee that he will be leader of the party at that time.

I'm sure many here will identify very closely with its small government agenda.

Imagine that a ukip candidate who doesn't bang on about the EU all the time, an excellent cross-party BetterOffOut campaign bringing eurosceptics from across the divide together and 30% of members here voting for definite EU withdrawal.

Things are looking up!

OK. I am prepared to trust the leadership on this, but they should not leave Roger Helmer out on a limb. The whip should be reinstated to Roger as a matter of urgency and he should be given a job to do.

Yes, I know that Mr Kirkhope may find that painful. But he wanted to be leader of the MEPs, so he will have to persuade the EPP leadership to allow Mr Helmer to be reinstated.

Cameron has promised to leave the EPP in 2009 but there is no guarantee that he will be leader of the party at that time.
Astonishingly if Cameron made a promise to cut taxes in 2009 when he was Prime Minister he'd be applauded, even though there is no gurantee he will be Prime Minister OR Party Leader that that time.

"However, I feel the greatest benefits are those which cannot be so easily measured, such a sense of shared values with parties from other nations."

The problem is that many of these parties are (economically at least) to the Left of us. I expect the French and German conservative parties supported the social chapter.

DC is as I thought all along - a man of straw - he lacks courage, he breaks his word and this these repects has revealed he is no different from most politicians. Its sad that the Tory party has now become the labour party in blue under his leadership. To break a pledge to leave the EPP within a short time is unforgiveable. What he should have said is that he will leave the EPP now and pledge that if returned to power he will have a referendum on whether to leave the EU entirely. I am about to start delivering 'Better off Out' leaflets and join UKIP!

As spin goes - and by spin I mean "line" - this really doesn't seem that bad. The pledge was to leave the EPP and leave the EPP we shall do.

Jon Gale and Umbongo are right.

Dave lied. Smoke is billowing from his underwear. Who cares if EPP is an anorak issue? Dave still lied. Smoke is billowing etc etc. Who cares if some of the other Eurosceptic parties don't dig poofs? Dave still lied. Smoke is etc etc.

Broken pledge. Don't even bother trying to spin it.

They will offer reinstatement of Helmer if that helps to stop a rebellion by Hannan and the Magnificent 7. They should stand their ground, and join Helmer outside the whip whatever the risks.

"As spin goes - and by spin I mean "line" - this really doesn't seem that bad. The pledge was to leave the EPP and leave the EPP we shall do."

The claim was that the pledge had been fulfilled; it has most certainly *not* been fulfilled.

A couple of comments on this discussion:
1) There were concrete guarantees and a clear timetable put on the delivery of this pledge by both David Cameron and William Hague in public and in private.It was not 3 years!
2) How is it good politics to have this row again in a potential general election year?
3) The "Movement for European Reform" sounds suspiciously like our current "European Democrats" figleaf, which has only ever met twice in the bar. Who is going to progress it? What funding will it have? The irony is that we will have to get EPP permission to spend any EP funds on it.They have refused to allow us to spend any of our own Parliamentary funds on the European Democrats, so they are unlikely to support another body! Perhaps the Editor could issue regular updates on progress. My guess is that it won't take much writing!
4) In 2009,we will need another 4 parties along with the ODS (who are excellent by the way)to form a group. Seeing as we've just effectively abandoned the Polish PiS (for the 2nd time)and other potential partners after they had gone out on a limb to support a new group, why would they rush to support us in 2009, when it suits us?

5) We have apparently rejected the option of sitting as unattached now but, according to William's interview, we will defenitely leave in 2009, if necessary without the ODS.So, presumably it will be OK to sit as non-attached then?

"

"As spin goes - and by spin I mean "line" - this really doesn't seem that bad. The pledge was to leave the EPP and leave the EPP we shall do."

The claim was that the pledge had been fulfilled; it has most certainly *not* been fulfilled."

Is this an attempt to bash Cameron because you think he implied that the EPP with drawl was a done deal?

The document is signed, the Conservative party will not be part of the EPP when the new European Parliament elections happen - That's a commitment fulfilled.

This thread, is disgusting, what a trivial issue about it, a hate campaign against the EU more than likely. Why is it that we don't get such comments for the NHS, health or crime? - The simple truth is the right-wing is obsessed with Europe, in some cases, most people blame Europe for all of Britain's problems. Cameron had to make the modest and sensible move and he has done, no-one can deny that Cameron underestimated the ease at which the withdrawal would take place.

Keep going Martin. I think you know what the majority of the party want you to do.

If DC can't keep his pledge, I hope some of you will.

Martin, what pledges do you say were made on the timetable and when? On 31 October 2005 Dan Hannan wrote on his website:

"There is a clear division between the candidates on this question. David Cameron would remove us from the EPP grouping immediately; David Davis would leave the decision to MEPs, a majority of whom favour the status quo. With Cameron, we'll be out of the EPP by Christmas; with Davis, we'll still have this albatross dragging us deckwards at the next European election."

http://www.hannan.co.uk/eurobriefings.htm#eb31oct05

Evidently he had got that from somewhere & believed that a clear pledge had been made.

But let's get this straight. Until this morning it was party policy to leave the EPP in months, not years. Now any MEP who leaves the EPP in reliance on that policy will have the whip suspended and will not be allowed to apply for selection. But come a date in 2009, all MEPs are then expected to switch around, and agree to leave the EPP or, presumably, be deselected.

The party has accomplished no mean feat today. It has managed to get both Roger Helmer & Caroline Jackson to agree with eachother. Both would agree:

"It's rather like saying to someone, 'I am going to divorce you, but I am going to live in the same house as you for the next three years and I am going to share the kitchen'."

Another point of interest. What about Law & Justice? We have today launched the new Movement for European Reform, which is dedicated to the ideals of a new Europe fit for the purposes of the 21st century (an objective which I whole-heartedly support BTW). If Law & Justice applies to join tomorrow, will it be allowed in?

Apparently part of the deal that has gone on is that Kirkhope has been told to sort out Roger Helmer's position, and quickly. That is a good thing.

From all the comments this must be the most commented upon news so far in the history of Conhome? I thought Dave wanted to keep quiet on Europe? One thing is spot on though. In 2009 there won't be any conservatives in the EPP because there won't be any conservative MEPs left.

'Apparently part of the deal that has gone on is that Kirkhope has been told to sort out Roger Helmer's position, and quickly. That is a good thing.'

Let's hope so.

"Is this an attempt to bash Cameron because you think he implied that the EPP with drawl was a done deal?"

No.

Andrew, we all want to help Roger Helmer, but Roger Helmer would put his country's interests above his own. He should not be used as a sop to persuade the uncorrupted MEP's to stop attacking the corruption in the EU. Sadly, they must now all take a risk and put their necks on the block.

In 3 years time the Enabling (End of Parliament) Acts will be through and operating, also Prescott's regions with or without referenda, and the EU Constitution will be rammed through. Britain will have ceased to exist.

The Magnificent 7 must stand up and resist the largest bloc of unaccountable power the world has even known. Martin Callanan above, Helmer, Heaton-Harris, Hannan, Deva, Syed, Van Orden, Kamall are the frontline in the struggle to prevent the overwhelming of democracy.

Hague's tried to impose another twisted compromise just like his 'Keep the £' for one Parliament of 2001. He's issuing threats. No one must bow down to such disgusting and cowardly tactics.

Sorry Andrew but if there have to be casualties, then let's get into battle now and take them. We cannot afford to sit in silence another day while the darkness descends. The small contingent of Conservative MEP's must shine a light and bring the events in Europe to the attention of Conservative and all others.

Bugger loyalty to Hague, or Cameron. They're playing their role maybe as they see they must, but it's no help. Freedom has a price to pay and someone must pay it. It's the most precious commodity - more precious than life itself. Let's fight with words to save it before someone has to fight with arms to get it back once it is lost. We cannot sit another day. Roger will understand.

"In 3 years ........ Britain will have ceased to exist."

Sure you're not exaggerating just a touch there?

End of Parliament

Regional Assemblies

EU Constitution

Au Revoir Albion

I don't think so, Andrew. I would like a few more to wake up and see what's going on around them. It's a secret programme sure, but surely you are not going to claim it's not happening now. We've had over thirty years warning.

www.the-tap.blogspot.com gives you more.


13/07/2006: EPP, Conservatives - Hans-Gert Poettering on statement by David Cameron and Mirek Topolánek on possible formation of a new European Group in 2009

The Chairman of the EPP-ED Group, Hans-Gert Poettering, has seen detailed media reports on a statement from David Cameron, leader of the British Conservatives together with Mirek Topolánek, leader of the Czech ODS Party on the possible formation of a new political group in the European Parliament following the European elections in June 2009.

"It is regrettable that this statement does not recognise the substantial and positive contribution by a large majority of Conservative and ODS MEPs within the EPP-ED Group", Poettering said. Conservative MEPs will now remain in the Group essentially based on the fact that the leadership of the Conservative Party in London has not succeeded in finding other parties to co-operate with in the European Parliament. This means the agreement between the Conservative Party and the EPP-ED Group, dating back to before European elections in 2004 on Group membership for the parliamentary term to 2009, will be kept in the letter if not in the spirit.

Poettering criticized the statement as being an unnecessary and not very helpful. Nobody can forecast today what the political situation will look like three years from now.

The EPP-ED Chairman confirmed his conviction that a long term cooperation between the EPP and the ED (British Conservatives plus Czech ODS) parts of the Group is not only in the interest of the centre right parties but also in the interest of Britain and the Czech Republic.

Further information from:
Katrin Ruhrmann, Tel, +32 475 493357
or R. A. Fitzhenry, Tel. +32 475 493356

Background:

British Conservative MEPs were first admitted to the EPP Group in 1992. Because the MEPs in question are not elected from an EPP member party list, the Group decides, on request by the MEPs after each European election, on their membership of the Group.

In 1999 the Group changed its name to the EPP-ED (European Democrats) Group to accommodate the Conservative MEPs in the Group. Before the European elections in 2004 the EPP-ED Group changed its statutes to take into account the special situation of allied MEPs (European Democrats). They were specifically granted the right to have "their independent view on constitutional and institutional matters regarding the future of Europe ". In addition the ED part of the Group is entitled to one of the positions of Vice-Chairmen of the Group.

The EPP-ED Group, currently with 263 MEPs, would remain the biggest group in the Parliament independently of the British Conservatives (27 MEPs) and the Czech ODS (9 MEPs), ahead of the Socialist group (200 MEPs).

Poettering criticized the statement as being an unnecessary and not very helpful. Nobody can forecast today what the political situation will look like three years from now.

I can forecast that in three years time Hans-Gert Poettering and the EPP will still be just as quick to legislate, impose and oppress; will still be as alien to British values as they are now, still as determined to destroy us as a nation and reduce us to regional councils and still as determined to trample on the rights of British subjects.

"Not very helpful"? Ah, as always, there is nothing new under the sun.

Forgive them.They are only obeying orders.

"The document is signed, the Conservative party will not be part of the EPP when the new European Parliament elections happen - That's a commitment fulfilled."

The Times is reporting today that even this delayed 'pledge' is undeliverable because to form a new group you need five not two members.

Did anyone also notice the stark difference in the way the pro-epp anti epp MEP's were treated by Cameron?

When Caroline Jackson pledged to stay in the EPP against the party line, not a word was said, no criticism, no reprimand.

When anti-EPP MEP's threaten to pull out aginst the party line,they are threatened with deselection.

Hhhmmmm. Strange. Does anyone still believe that Roger Helmer had any hope of being reinstated?

If we come out now, by 2009 we might have five countries with us. By staying locked in, it is far less likely. We need as many of our MEP's as possible to risk deselection and get on with the job, fulfilling Cameron's promise for him, or this issue will become a faultline in his leadership. Once a new grouping is successfully up and running the talk of deselection will also be dropped. It's a big risk for our MEP's, but it's one they have to take.

As Chad says, the europhiles rebel with impunity. It tells you all you need to know about who is running the Conservative Party.

William, Chad, I was being tactful but what the hell.

To be honest, I wouldn't trust Kirkhope as far as I could throw him. I don't believe for a second he'll make any attempt to reinstate Roger because as soon as he's back in his little kingdom of Brussels, he'll go back to being lord and master. I'm very pleased to see Martin Callanan post his true thoughts on here, which make some very salient points.

To be honest, I don't know where this leaves Roger Helmer and 7 Eurosceptics. To announce a divorce for 3 years time is ludicrous. What is a matter we can all influence, is the selection of the next bunch of MEP's. Make it a reflection of the memberships view and expose the Europhiles.

Notwithstanding that I find seating arrangements impossible to get excited about (whatever pushes your button, and some people's buttons clearly get pushed to the extreme on this), this is surely good news for the eurorealist majority of us? That's those who do not wish to leave the EU but admit the anomaly of sitting with politicians whose views are much more statist/corporatist etc than our own centre of gravity? Why should we have a revolution, when we can have a calm re-ordering of events? I think it's a good outcome. But I'm lying if I pretend it doesn't push at least one of my own buttons -- just think, no more Caroline Jackson as a Tory MEP (I'm presuming she'll stick to her EPP principles and step down in 2009?). That's something I can happily spend the next 3 years contemplating.

I'm glad also for ridiculous emotive type reasons that we're reaching out to new europe to build this new alliance. I'm sure there are lots of others who will flock to the throng once it gets going. But let's make sure the ground rules are clear and that we don't leave one tepid saucepan of fudge for another. Seating arrangements, though not as exciting as pan-european manifestos of intent, are at least guaranteed not to interfere with the real objective, of getting Labour out of No. 10.

The problem with all whats been said above is that the ODS as yet is not in power in the Czech republic due to the 100/100 split in terms of seats. If the same happens in the country like Ukraine were the orange coalition fell apart,(which is a disaster for us in terms of future gas supply) as the Socialists decided to join the Party of the Regions and the Communists, we could have a chance of having a quicker agreement with the ODS(ie already brides for changing sides have been mentioned).
As for Law and Justice I think we have to be careful of their image of the two ex child film stars as they have no track record at the moment. Finally what other groups were being mentioned outside these two as we still need at least two others?

I don't think so, Andrew. I would like a few more to wake up and see what's going on around them. It's a secret programme sure, but surely you are not going to claim it's not happening now. We've had over thirty years warning.
William, so 7 votes are going to be able to equalise the well over 200 votes that form the EPP? Stopping further European integration will happen at a state level, where the treaties are signed. The European Parliament at present doesn't have the power simply to seize all powers from member states, a new treaty to enable them to do that would have to be signed.

DC is either incredibly stupid (I don't believe that)or dishonest(which I do believe) about membership of the EPP and the EU itself. He wants to change the EU from within but does not say how he will do so when 24 other countries refuse to agree. He knows full well that Britain is fast becoming a province of Europe under a corrupt, Soviet style goverment into which we continue to pour £6 billion a year. This, to an organisation whose own auditors have refused to sign off the accounts for 11 years! How many readers of this comment would put their money into a company that the auditors declared the accounts unsound for one year, never mind 11? In 3 years we will be drowning in EU bureacracy and perhaps most of us will at last realise that our politicians have sold us down the river. In 3 years we will no longer be an independent country - we are half way there now. The only party offering us our freedom again is UKIP who would take us out immediately. So, carry on Cameron - you are fast becoming the best recruiting sergeant UKIP ever had!

The total EU budget, covering several hundred million people, is something like £70 billion a year. That's about the same as Switzerland, Norway or Denmark, nations with a few million people. British government expenditure is seven times that, Germany ten times.

Can we please have some perspective? Yes, the EU is a mess, but all this talk of "Britain becoming extinct" is just ludicrous.

When Dan Hannan was reselected as our MEP candidate prior to the last Euro election he made clear to all involved in selection(incl the Party leadership) that he would not support the EEP. Later, he campaigned overtly for DC during the leadership election, even chairing events with DC across his patch. On both counts he has been honest throughout. He and his supporters have been badly let down by this latest procrastination and a less than honest gesture from DC et al.

Is anyone surprised that Hannan once more turns out to be full of hot air?

First Tories to resign?
http://www.westbournemouthukip.com/letters.htm

Some of the comments made here suggesting that Polish Law and Justice is racist, homophobic or fascist party are untrue.

The article from PinkNews.co.uk which might influence most of the opinions, fails to mention that 2 people (branded in the article as homophobes) quoted are from different party (called League of Polish Families). Lech Kaczynski in his 3.5 years as Warsaw major banned one of the gay marches and this march eventually went ahead.
And apart from one example when a club run by gay activist was closed (he did not own the place and he did not pay the rent), there is no evidence that "gay bars have been closed and organizations banned in Warsaw".

All Law and Justice party can be accused of is opposing a gay propaganda and underlining a role of traditional family. But if having a different views then Polish gay activates (some of them working closely with post communists) is seen by Conservatives as homophobic behavior then I would advice William Hague to read less of PinkNews.

I am not surprised that L and J has a very bad press in Europe as most of information journalists acquire to write their articles is supplied by their Polish colleagues. And they are mostly against L and J.

today i have written to david cameron regarding his envolvement in the conservative party leaving the epp-ed in 2009. in 2005 i wrote to david cameron asking for him to reinstate roger helmer mep. his reply as "i have no control over the conservatives in the european parliament. it's up to the leader of the conservtives in europe to deal with this issue". if this is so how can mr cameron now pull us out of the epp-ed if he has no control of the conservatives in europe.

lindgren sclerosis atrohpicus lindgren sclerosis atrohpicus,delegate in c to raise an event for leaving a text box delegate in c to raise an event for leaving a text box,melony ghee griffiths goals house of delegates melony ghee griffiths goals house of delegates,zana murdock zana murdock,game freelancer game freelancer,outlook delegate permissions outlook delegate permissions,onset of multiple sclerosis in people age 50 onset of multiple sclerosis in people age 50,waterman flow regulators waterman flow regulators,murdock hydrant repair murdock hydrant repair,who were the first delegates to sign the constitution who were the first delegates to sign the constitution,

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker