Speaking to the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) Monday the UK’s relentlessly optimistic Prime Minister David Cameron said that support for continued EU membership in the country was “wafer thin”, but that he believed the electorate could be turned after he succeeds in implementing changes in Britain’s membership.
Cameron’s plan actually goes beyond optimism and more towards accurately predicting winning times at next year’s Winter Olympics; such are the monumental odds of accomplishing that which he is quite good at making sound simple.
Step One is he actually plans on getting re-elected in 2015 which in itself will be an achievement only made possible by the hopeless lack of popularity of Labour Leader Ed Miliband. Step Two is he believes that negotiating meaningful change with the EU is actually possible, despite it being an immovable money guzzling behemoth. Step Three will then be convincing the electorate in 2017 that all is fixed in EU land and we should stay, while the said electorate finds standing room only on the bus to work because of newly arrived immigrants from Bulgaria & Romania.
"It is my judgement that our current consent of remaining inside the EU is wafer-thin - we have not made the argument enough about why Europe matters” Cameron told the business leaders while not actually explaining why Europe does matter. It’s as if it’s just assumed knowledge of the enlightened. Then the Prime Minister gets really scary as he continues.
"I sit round that European Union table ... and I can see this organisation is going to change. It is changing in front of our eyes because of the euro. Those countries that are in the euro, they need change to happen."
He can just see its going to change sitting round the table! This is the kind of optimism that filmmakers are loading up the latest Christmas films with. Yes things are going to change simply because we have a desire for them to. Tinker Bell will fly across the top of the room sprinkling fairy dust, snow will begin to fall and everyone comes to their senses.
At one point Cameron almost makes the case for an EU exit saying "We haven't made the argument enough about why Europe matters and frankly there are lots of things in the EU that badly need reform: it is too costly; it is not flexible enough; it doesn't help our competitiveness enough. It needs to change." This Mr. Cameron is why it’s time to leave!
The Prime Minister unfortunately does not see people for being as absolutely disingenuous as they can be, thus he has a false confidence in the EU leadership. That he believed Vladimir Putin earlier this year when he was assured of no further Russian involvement in Syria illustrates this. You expect that from a young idealist but you’re supposed to learn from your mistakes, and it seems as if Cameron thinks he can persuade anybody that what he thinks is what we should do.
This maybe is why he and President Obama are so tight. The American Leader frequently returns to the concept that people don’t support something because they don’t understand it. Subsequently he sets out to re-explain it. In reality they do understand and have already rejected the concept.
CBI Director General John Cridland said: "We have looked beyond the political rhetoric to examine the pros and cons of EU membership and British business is unequivocal - the single market is fundamental to our future. But the EU isn't perfect and there is a growing unease about the creeping extension of EU authority. Europe has to become more open, competitive and outward-looking if we are to grow and create opportunities and jobs for all our citizens."
Cridland here is very contradictory. It’s almost as if he needs to acknowledge the obvious, the complete mis-trust of ever growing government; but still pursues the business benefits of EU membership as the greater good. Moreover he’s sold on the idea of the global market with central governance – with bureaucrats dealing him in on every hand.
The problem for the British people is that the greater good of business is not necessarily in the best interests of the nation. Business sees what works for them regardless of the effect it has on the populace. Generally thriving business is good for everybody but pro-EU progressive types sacrifice liberty, culture and religious freedoms if need be to advance their cause toward global governance.
EU governance contains a lot of crony-capitalism. Its pay to play but that suits a lot of business interests who have the capital to enter the game and to cultivate the necessary political connections that keep them at the head table.
I was asked recently if Britain wouldn’t be worse off if it left the EU! The answer is no and here’s some reasons why. First every household would save £300 per year by not contributing to the EU budget. That money goes back into the British economy instead of to somewhere on the continent.
Second is that Britain would gain influence. The country goes from having 1 vote in 27 to bargaining as an equal entity. The UK is the sixth largest economy in the world and everybody wants to trade with it. The EU has made special deals with, for example, the five million people of Norway; there is no doubt they would negotiate with a nation twelve times the size that sits on their doorstep.
Third is that mass immigration, currently forced by EU membership, could be put on hold. Britain would be free again to evaluate its own policy based on its own needs rather than the whims of other European MP’s.
Fourth and finally would be a restoration of judicial independence. The rulings of European tribunals would end, the threat of arrest warrants issued in Eastern Europe would disappear, and the UK would once again administer justice according to the will of its own people.
Shadow chancellor Ed Balls, addressing the conference said: "Britain is better placed to shape Europe's future if we are fully engaged rather than having one foot out the door".
No, Mr. Balls, Britain is better placed in a position of strength which it does not have as an EU member.
