We’ve campaigned. We’ve lobbied. We’ve marched. We’ve demonstrated (in December, you recall, I was fined £600 for demonstrating for a referendum in the Strasbourg parliament). We’ve collected signatures on petitions. We’ve printed leaflets. There have been dozens of village referendums. We’ve run “I Want a Referendum” postal ballots with stunning response rates, and 89% against the Treaty. Yet still the wretched Treaty goes on, and while the House of Lords, or the Irish Referendum, or the Poles could still put a spoke in the wheel, I’m not holding my breath.
No wonder so many on our side of the debate are spitting with frustration. We’ve won the arguments hands down, but the Treaty marches on like Frankenstein, impervious to attack. We haven’t landed the killer blow.
One man has come up with a new idea that could just work. Stuart Wheeler (a well-known Conservative supporter, and a campaigner on Europe, on climate, and human rights) is taking legal action. He is going to court to demand a judicial review of the government’s decision to deny a referendum, which he argues infringes the reasonable expectations of voters based on the government’s manifesto commitments. He has engaged a heavy-weight QC, Rabinder Singh.
We know that previous attempts to challenge the European project in the courts, based on infringement of the British Constitution, have failed. But we are advised that in this case there is some prospect of success. Even if the judicial review is not granted, it is possible that the court may criticise the government’s approach, which could have a positive effect on the Lords’ deliberations. The case is up on April 22nd (the eve of Saint George’s Day).
The problem is that litigation doesn’t come cheap, and while Stuart Wheeler deserves our gratitude for supporting the action so far, he needs our help. If you really want to know what you can do to stop the Brussels Juggernaut, here’s your chance. Send a cheque to the Stuart Wheeler Lisbon Litigation Account, at Penthouse A, 21 Davies Street, London W1K 3DE. This could just be the killer blow we’re waiting for.
Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689 is fatal to this action. It is strange how those campaigning against British membership of the European Union will claim to defend the British constitution while actually attempting to undermine it, but perhaps this should not be a surprise given Dicey’s novel reinterpretations of the constitution when he found it inconvenient over Irish home rule.
Pingback: Stuart Wheelker plans challenge to "Constitutional" treaty
Oh dear! Another court action – doomed to raise the hopes, suck the money and resources of the faithful – and fail. I’m sorry Roger – respect you I do – but you are in the wrong party and only a truly massive vote away from those three main (three-in-one all the same) parties – to either UKIP or the BNP – can work.
Sorry to be so negative – but we’ve been here so many times before – it’s just not encouraging – nor funny – any more.
I came across your QC some years ago in the Court of Appeal – he was very impressive and the CoA judges were deferential to him! I hope you get a fair hearing and a win.
The Free England Party wish your challenge good fortune. We are short of cash, but are happy to help you on this one.
“Faint heart never won the day”
We have to keep trying
Persistence is the name of the game, so we must keep at it to achieve our goal. The other requirement is, as Tony Blair put it ‘education, education, education’ of the Great British Public to understand what is lost and what is gained by keeping our Sovereignty.
Chris Cooke: If a UKIP or (heaven help us) a BNP government is our only hope, then there is no hope at all. I believe that there is hope, provided we all do all we can, and keep at it. I salute Stuart Wheeler for his determined and principled initiative.
I think David Boothroyd is right about Article IX of the Bill of Rights. It’s a long time since a British court attempted to overturn an Act of the British Parliament, in fact on the last occasion it may even have been an English court and the English Parliament. Not even if the ECJ tells it to do so, because although the ECJ fancies that it’s now our supreme legal authority the British courts haven’t yet accepted that claim. Still, it may be worth a go to see what the judges say on that score.
Roger Your comments on UKIP are a disgrace . They are the only minority party saying GET out of Europe. Your party whilst asking for a referendum on the EU actually are pro EU. So you are obviously in the wrong party.
One moment, if you please, Lord Lincs. You say that U.K.I.P. are the only party openly advocating withdrawal from the E.U. This is patently incorrect as the British National Party are wholly committed to withdrawal as their website and publications are constantly proclaiming.
Your comments regarding the three main parties are spot on, though, as all of them wish to see we British wiped out as a nation people.
“Lord Lincs”: All I am saying is that I don’t think UKIP has a cat in hell’s chance of forming a government in Westminster. That’s not a disgrace. That’s common sense.
What we should have, of course, is a political party offering government by referenda, along the lines of http://www.1party4all.co.uk but as ONE PARTY where all the other disgruntleds could join without compromising on their principles.
Let’s face it, it is the only way to get out of the EU and the only way to be the only only protest party that represents the views of the politically marginalised, and that means all of us who are not MPs!
Further to Richard Helmer’s remark: “If a UKIP or (heaven help us) a BNP government is our only hope, then there is no hope at all”. Even a single British National Party MP would act as “shock therapy” to the British Establishment and, in order to head off further advances by that party, our political Establishment would rapidly change direction over the EU, mass immigration, and many other policies, to ones that the “silent majority” would much prefer. Tho’ desirable, it is not necessary for the BNP to form a government at the next election in order to exert a huge political influence; it is the realisation of this that accounts for the venom with which they are attacked by the mainstream parties.
It’s Roger not Richard…. And if the BNP is the answer then we are asking the wrong question, that’s for sure!!!
Well Roger or Richard or whoever you wish to be, there are only two political parties in the race, the Lib/Lab/Con fraternity and the BNP. As the former are made up of benefit cheats and scroungers who cheat the poor to enrich themselves, that leaves the BNP and I believe that they will do a credible job.
The BNP are the only party that will save Great Britain when will people wake up to this fact.
Am I correct in thinking that the new constitution (read: revised treaties) allows a small group of functionaries (the commission?) to pass laws which Directly apply to each country, without any debate, or voting by the peoples of the respective countries? and that further, the commission, which originally had a representative from each country, now will be pared down to a select few of 18, so that many countries (possibly the UK) won’t even have a representative, participate in the debate or even know that a law is being debated until it is passed and enforced (on the UK)?
Pingback: Ireland and the Lisbon “Treaty” « The Church of Kharma Futures