Dave’s deal: trivial, embarrassing, fraudulent


David Cameron is seeking to sell his “renegotiation” with the EU as a major breakthrough, an historic moment when our relationship with the EU is totally re-set, and our independence and sovereignty reasserted.  It is no such thing.

Most of the points he is claiming are either already in place (the €uro opt-out) or meaningless (“ever closer union”) or irrelevant (welfare benefits) or hugely doubtful in terms of delivery (red cards, protections for non-€uro states).

In his famous Bloomberg speech, Cameron said “…we need to have a bigger and more significant role for national parliaments … It is national parliaments, which are, and will remain, the true source of real democratic legitimacy and accountability in the EU … power must be able to flow back to Member States, not just away from them”.  Great rhetoric, but nothing in Cameron’s deal will deliver it.  Indeed, the key problem if we stay in the EU is that there will be no democratic legitimacy and accountability at all, neither in national parliaments nor in the European institutions.

Let’s start with immigration — according to opinion polls the public’s biggest concern.  They are worried about wage compression, and about intense pressures on our social infrastructure and social cohesion.  They are increasingly worried about the security threat as Jihadists use the current turmoil to infiltrate Europe.

Today we have a system where we have no control over EU migrants, and therefore no overall control, but where we discriminate against non-EU members (and therefore against Commonwealth citizens), and in favour of EU citizens.  Clearly, this means we are also discriminating in favour of people who are predominantly white, and against Commonwealth citizens, many of whom are non-white.

Cameron has very successfully diverted the debate from immigration control to the detail of in-work welfare benefits and child allowances.  But these are peripheral issues, and even the Office for Budget Responsibility has said they will have little effect on immigration.  Our Prime Minister has successfully ducked the main issue of total numbers – and we must not let him get away with it.

We must remember that the EU is a moveable feast.  If we stay, we may find that Germany has given EU passports to a million migrants, letting them come to Britain.  We may find that Turkey (population 75 million, and borders with Syria and Iraq) has joined the EU — and joined in “Free Movement”.

Then, the €uro opt-out, of which Cameron seems very proud.  But we (and Denmark) already have permanent opt-outs from €uro membership under the Maastricht Treaty.  Cameron is claiming credit for John Major’s work.  But he has not rushed to reclaim John Major’s opt-out from the Social Chapter, as he should have done.  In his Bloomberg speech Cameron said “It is neither right nor necessary to claim that the integrity of the single market, or full membership of the European Union, requires the working hours of British hospital doctors to be set in Brussels irrespective of the views of British parliamentarians and practitioners”.   Absolutely right, Dave — but you haven’t delivered a solution.

Then, “Ever Closer Union”.  Cameron claims to have a new opt-out from ever closer union — though it appears to depend on future Treaty Change, which will be fiercely resisted.  But it is also meaningless.  As long as we in Britain remain subject to the constant flow of new Directives and Regulations from Brussels, we are committed to ever closer union, with or without those three words.

I was in a meeting in Brussels recently with prominent German CSU/EPP MEP Elmar Brok, whose views are highly influential in these matters.  He said “’ever closer union’ has no legal force”.  Right, Elmar.  So removing those words has no effect.  It is rather like the situation with the Lisbon Treaty, where they agreed to drop references to the flag and the anthem, knowing that they caused offence to sceptics.  But the flag is still flown, and the anthem still played.  There was no effect at all in the real world.  And so it is with “ever closer union”.

“Competitiveness”: Cameron has an agreement that the EU should focus on competitiveness.  But I’ve been in the European parliament for seventeen years, and I’ve heard that kind of talk over and over again.  Remember when the EU was going to become “the world’s most competitive knowledge-based economy by 2010”?  (In fact, it slipped back relatively in the noughties).  Meaningless verbiage — it will make no difference in reality.

Protection for non-€urozone countries: This requires detailed study — it is highly complex, and will keep commentators busy for weeks (and quite possibly keep lawyers busy for years).  But the EU is extraordinarily clever at by-passing road-blocks.  I wouldn’t bet the ranch on the vague promise we have so far.

More generally, the EU loves to offer “Red Cards” to overcome opposition, confident that these offer some reassurance, and yet are very difficult to invoke.  And in any case they rarely deliver more than the right to keep talking.  We’d need 55% support to invoke the so-called “Emergency Brake”.  It’s as if the Referee at a football match had to phone a dozen other referees for permission to issue a red card.  Not very practical.

Moreover many of Cameron’s so-called concessions can be challenged after the referendum (if we vote to stay) by the European parliament, and by the ECJ.  Like so many things in the EU, it’s not a done deal.  It’s part of a process.  And the process is engineered to go in one direction: Ever Closer Union.

Cameron asked for less than his Conservative manifesto promised.  Tusk offered him less than he’d asked for.  And that has now been further watered down.  The PR man has conducted a PR exercise, and will now try to sell us the snake oil.

So what should he have asked for?  At the very least, he should have asked for reinstatement of the Social Chapter opt-out.  He should have demanded a veto over European law for our parliament and for our Supreme Court.  He should have got full control of our borders.  He should have negotiated a reduction in our EU budget contributions.  He should have taken back control of energy, fisheries, agriculture, environment.  So what should have been left?  Essentially a Free Trade Area (if we had also got rid of the Common External Tariff).  I’d happily settle for a European Free Trade Area, and a relationship based solely on free trade and voluntary intergovernmental cooperation.

But hang on, I hear you say, you called it “Fraudulent”?  Isn’t that a bit harsh?  But if Cameron is hyping his deal as a major change in Britain’s relationship with the EU, then that’s just plain not true.  It is, indeed, fraudulent.



This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to Dave’s deal: trivial, embarrassing, fraudulent

  1. Ex-expat Colin says:

    Michael Gove today and out..says it as it is (and for quite some time)


    ok..just popping off for a lunch or 3

  2. Sally Culling says:

    Roger – listen to this for discrimination: I came to visit my parents at Christmas and Harry suffered a little burn to his hand. He is OK but had to seek emergency treatment.

    He required two visits to the Burns clinic to change his dressings that week.

    I got a bill for 363 pounds. I was told this included a 50% markup for people from outside EU countries using the NHS! I explained that my children and I are British citizens (we all hold passports!) She said it doesn’t matter, I live in America & that is all that matters.

    My American insurance company has refused the claim, in my view on and illegitimate grounds. I am obviously going to pay my bill, because that’s what responsible people do. But it is completely infuriating that if we were living in Belgium, this wouldn’t happen. If I was a Polish person living in Nottingham, this wouldn’t happen! The grounds for using the nhs are screwed up. And more to the point, the 50% “mark up” is highly discriminatory in my view. I’ll send you the legislation on that!!

    Sent from my iPhone


    • Roger Helmer MEP says:

      Thanks Sally. You’re right — intolerable. May I quote in my newsletter please?

    • Jane Davies says:

      I’m also a British born citizen at present living in Canada, and I paid NI and taxes for more than 30 years but it counts for nothing if on a visit back home I need to see a doctor. So how come non citizens/taxpayers get free healthcare costing the NHS millions per year, or so we are led to believe?
      I quote……
      “Within the UK, free NHS treatment is provided on the basis of someone being ‘ordinarily resident’. It is not dependent upon nationality, payment of UK taxes, national insurance contributions, being registered with a GP, having an NHS number or owning property in the UK.” – See more at: http://www.worldofexpats.com/expats-beware-you-now-have-pay-nhs-treatment#sthash.rhNVluM7.dpuf

  3. catweazle666 says:

    Strange how rarely anyone refers to acquis communautaire, whereby once a state has surrendered a competence to the EU, it cannot be reclaimed under any circumstances whatsoever.

    So bar for a little tinkering with the wording and tweaking the parts of the regulations that were oir own administration’s gold plating, there is nothing that can actually change.

    Then there is the business of the progressive replacement of our own legal system – Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights and the plethora of precedents – flexible and grown over many centuries whereby a thing is legal unless specifically ruled otherwise, with the odious Code Napoleon under which works on the opposite principle altogether.

    And how about the ECHR, that prevents us repatriating terrorists because they have a pet cat but has no problem with deporting an 82 year old widow to South Africa where she has no family…

    We MUST get out.

  4. Sally Culling says:

    This is how the additional costs were charged! We were actually charged just for the two visits to the burns clinic and not the emergency treatment (I have no clue how they come up with these things).

    The care was quite outstanding btw.

    Hello Sally, the costs are taken from our NHS national Tariff for a first outpatient appointment and a follow up appointment, we also have to charge a market force factor of 3.8725% and a since April 2015 we have to charge an additional 50%. If you need the medical records you have to contact our PALS team as I have no access to any patients records due to Data Protection. I will send a hard copy to your address and a copy via email too. best wishes and a peaceful and happy Christmas time to you too. claudia Claudia Kuster Overseas Visitors Officer Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust C-Floor, East Block, room 3107 Derby Road Nottingham NG7 2UH Phone: 0115 9249924 ext 70339 Bleep: 784 1063 (from City ring Switchboard QMC) Help us prevent infections at our hospitals by cleaning your hands. Remember – hand washing is the simplest and most effective way of preventing infections. http://nuhnet/newsdesk/Pages/Overseasvisitors.aspx http://www.nuh.nhs.uk/patients-and-visitors/information-for-patients/patients-visiting-from-overseas/ Sent from my iPhone


  5. We were rightly warned Cameron’s return would re-enact Neville Chamberlain’s “Peace in our time,” (1938), but at least that negotiation bought time for useful rearmament.

    All the PM’s agreements allow for is more fraudulent candyfloss to deceive wavering voters.

    Thus, the still scorned Neville C. was a more nationally useful operator than the hollow, misguided Cameron, a Liberal masquerading as a Tory, who has lost this previously Tory vote.

    (The only useful phrase of Cameron’s in recent times has been “Green Cr@p!”

  6. Jane Davies says:

    So no surprises there then. Now the blustering and over use of smoke and mirrors begins. UKIP has reached the point now where the people need to hear the truth about what this so called agreement really means and that it is not set in stone and can be backtracked on by the dishonest bunch of clowns in Brussels.
    By the way did you know the ancient meaning of the word ‘Tory’?
    Crooks and thieves…..very fitting!

    “Lord Rochester was the first Tory to lead a Ministry in the Parliament of England
    The word “Tory” derives from the Middle Irish word tóraidhe; modern Irish tóraí: outlaw, robber or brigand, from the Irish word tóir, meaning “pursuit”, since outlaws were “pursued men”.[4][5] It was originally used to refer to an Irish outlaw and later applied to Confederates or Royalists in arms.[6] The term was thus originally a term of abuse, “an Irish rebel”, before being adopted as a political label in the same way as Whig.”

  7. Roger – nice article!

    Just revoking the 1972 parliament act is not going to be legal. It will break the Treaty of Lisbon which was signed by Gordon Brown (behind a nice safe wall).

    We need to make sure of our membership of EEA.
    We need, temporarily, to join EFTA on the quiet.
    We need to win the referendum and then go for Article 50.
    After that there are a lot of things to clear up. Maybe leaving the EEA, maybe leaving EFTA.

    Mr Cameron is not the man to do this. We need a negotiator.

    • Roger Helmer MEP says:

      Thanks Mike. I personally prefer the Article 50 route. It’s more orderly and less confrontational, and gives industry the assurance that nothing fundamental changes overnight. And I don’t like the EFTA solution. I believe that in the two years under Article 50 we can negotiate our own free trade deal with the rump-EU. That’s because (A) Article 50 requires the Commission to negotiate favourable trade terms with neighboring countries and ex-members: (B) It is overwhelmingly in the interests of both parties to have such a deal; (c) it is even more in their interests than ours (because of the trade deficit): (D) Worst case — we’re still covered by WTO rules — and the duties UK companies might have to pay under the Common External Tariff would be less than half our annual net budget contributions.

      • pirate3012 says:

        I have read that it is the technical barriers to trade that would be the problem if we were not in the EEA. Our goods would no longer be accepted without being tested, causing huge expense and delay. If that is the case then this is a rug that can be pulled from under us at the opportune moment. The first step is to win the referendum and surely if people can be assured that trade and so jobs will not be affected, that must work in our favour. There are no examples of trade agreements being completed with the EU in 2 years as far as I am aware. Again, we leave ourselves at risk of losing if this is pointed out, as it is sure to be. We don’t need to rush leaving. If other EU countries see us exit in a safe and orderly manner, it may encourage others to follow. Let’s hope so, but first we’ve a referendum to win with major players opposing us. Once we are out we can plan our next step.

      • catweazle666 says:

        “Our goods would no longer be accepted without being tested”

        Our goods are already tested and carry the CE mark, as do all goods from whatever source including China sold in the EU.

        So that’s just another piece of mendacious alarmist claptrap.

        ” and the duties UK companies might have to pay under the Common External Tariff”

        As we run a trade deficit with the EU, any duties payable on trade between us and the EU will be to our benefit.

        Does anyone seriously believe that all those BMW, Fiat etc. dealers are going to close? Or that French wine and cheese are going to disappear from our shelves? How are Airbus going to fulfil their contracts without Rolls-Royce engines from Derby, wings from Filton and avionics from Manchester?

        Seems some people are trying to make out that overnight an impenetrable barrier is going to appear in the middle of the English Channel. It isn’t.

      • Ex-expat Colin says:

        As regards engineering standards they already exist internationally. I have been involved in their development/construction. ISO/IEC and a number of UK Defence Standards that have emerged within civil aviation and elsewhere. There is little to be tested unless its completely new and requires standards developed and that means international co-operation EU or no EU. This stuff is conducted prior to market.

        The standards required by most anybody in the world exist already. If you at any time doubt that the standards have been employed adequately then you sample test. Its pre-market activities that avoid any expensive delay.

  8. For a broad view from an obviously honest politico, suggest seeing Michael Gove’s statement.
    Even doubters and certainly fence sitters should be moved by his analysis and conclusions.
    He should be considered a future, Tory, leader, unlike any of the Liberalesque clique in charge now.

    • David says:

      Im dissapointed in Mays reasons for joining the in camp, they have got past our security already, in UK, in EU, so a bit of a fallacy in my opinion

  9. Jane Davies says:

    Just heard on our CBC news that Cameron has “successfully negotiated new deals” with the EU! But what really had me shouting at the TV was the statement that the leave campaign was “lacking a strong leader”!
    I’m going to CBC’s news facebook page to vent.

  10. tonyleatham says:

    The “deal” that Dave is offering isn’t in any way shape or form legally binding: http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=85933 and http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=85937

    I know Richard North is a divisive figure and does himself no favours whatsoever, but on this sort of thing, he’s usually correct. I can’t help but think that the Leave cause would be boosted if more people understood what a sham this deal is – it’s no more than window dressing for Dave.

    Hopefully, eventually, someone in the MSM will get hold of this and then the cat is truly out of the bag

  11. B Hough says:

    If we were to leave the E.U. would Germany, France etc. stop
    selling us cars and other road transports?
    Would it not be great if we only bought cars etc. made in the U.K.?
    Think of the employment figures.
    Would Germany etc. stop selling us wind turbines plus all the
    services they require?
    Would it not be great if we made our own?
    Think of the employment figures.
    Would Germany, France stop building our railway rolling stock etc.
    Would it not be great if we built our own?
    Think of the employment figures.
    Would France refuse to build our power statioms?
    Would it not be great if we built our own?
    Think of the employment figures.
    Would our postal service be returned to us?
    We are told that we are safer in the E.U. as a safeguard against terrorists.
    It is due to the E.U. that so many terrorist cells have been able to
    set up in Europe.
    Slowly the whole political scene in Europe will change.
    In a few countries it already has, check `youtube` for some terrible
    scenes in almost all Europe.
    Why any British prime minister would be in favour of handing power
    to some unelected parliament in Europe I cannot imagine, unless
    it is in anticipation of some future lucrative reward within the E.U.
    as has happened in other cases we know about!
    Let us be outside and watch it fall apart at the seams.

    • David says:

      Great stuff. Even Kinnock agreed “Its Not a proper Parliament”. Nuff said

      Yes crime & bad stuff happening in europe, take a look at Pamela Gellers site in the good ole USA to read stuff you will probably not find elsewhere, “crime by immigrant” figures are truly massive, yet they dont seem to be by American immigrants, French Immigrants, English, Canadian, I could add to the list but you get the drift.

  12. Ex-expat Colin says:

    I didn’t watch this today…Cameron on Marr show: (from D. Mail)

    “Warning that leaving the EU would not signal an end of freedom of movement, Mr Cameron told the Andrew Marr Show this morning: ‘If we were to leave the EU and we were to try to insist on full access to the single market, like Norway has for instance, every other country that’s got that sort of deal has had to accept the free movement of people and a contribution to the EU budget”.

    So the large sales into UK continue and we cannot sell back? That indicates a UK crash fairly quickly I think…needs rapid attention about now.

    • David says:

      Sorry to hear that you didnt watch Colin, but I can understand why you dont want to be made to puke.

    • Ex-expat Colin says:

      Am on the verge now David having flipped thru this:


      And the money went where exactly – to who/for what. No wonder the EU accounts don’t get signed off…18 years?

    • B Hough says:

      Methinks Mr. Cameron doth protect too much! our membership of the EU.
      This whole immigration debacle seems to have been initiated by Mr Blair & Mr Bush.
      But full advantage of the situation is, I`ll bet, being taken by Isis to infiltrate its` supporters into European countries, let us try to stop the UK being included by taking control of our immigration and borders.
      It is said that the EU has prevented war since its inception, yes between member states, but it has also aided something far more sinister!
      As I said before, let us be on the outside looking in!
      Maybe the US and Mr Trump see the same problems.

    • Roger Helmer MEP says:

      South Korea has a Free Trade Deal with the EU. Are you telling me that 50 million South Koreans have free movement? The Remainians always talk about Norway and Switzerland, who are quasi-associate-members of the EU. We don’t want that status. We want independence.

  13. Pingback: Camerons “deal” is fraudulent | UKIP Hillingdon

  14. Anyoldiron says:

    All I know for sure, is if the people vote to remain in the EU it will be FOREVER. That brings forth a question whether there would be any need for anyone in those two Houses of Parliament that could only obey the orders of foreigners-forever. especially as Mr Cameron set up the twelve REGIONS of the EU when he first came into alleged POWER.

  15. Jane Davies says:

    I heard Cameron say the UK borders will not be any protection even when the UK leaves. So what he is saying is he cannot protect the people from unwanted immigration. That just tells me that he and his government are not up to the job of governing alone. So the people must insist on an election and get the right people in power to do the job they are paid for. Making laws and protecting the borders and putting the country first.

    • Roger Helmer MEP says:

      Exactly right, Jane. The threat is free movement, with (also, it seems) free movement of Jihadists and Kalashnikovs. Cameron also said we wouldn’t be able to demand police/security cooperation. OK. We can’t demand it. But it would be in everyone’s interests to have it. So we’ll have it.

      • B Hough says:

        I think a mistake a lot of people make is in thinking that Jihad is a military type of action and that if the time comes we within the EU will be able to defeat it.
        But it is far more subtle, it can come about by stealth, ie. a slow take over of a country by outnumbering the native population. At a certain point the governments can be elected by the infiltrators and unrest begin to develop between governments taken over by different factions as we see in Iraq etc.
        If we are a part of that Europe then we will be in the same position, if not we will be outside looking in as in 1939 with hopefully our old ally by our side.
        The EU has helped this whole scenario take place by going blindly along with policies that have aided its purpose.
        Is it too late even now?

  16. Anyoldiron says:

    What Price Words?

    So many words have been written,
    Maybe too many words have been said,
    For so many lives have been broken,
    Too many of our forces now dead.

    Yet all of them fought for freedom,
    For independence, sovereignty of our own,
    Yet that freedom was treated so casually,
    That they paid the ultimate price is well known.

    In Iraq and far-flung Afghanistan,
    Shamefully, ill equipped for bleak terrain,
    But with pride for those beloved soldiers,
    Are solemnly remembered once again.

    In memory of our dedicated Services
    Sent to war by politicians’ weak and wrong,
    They fought the battle on foreign soil,
    Never to come back where they belong.

    Forever to hold close in our hearts,
    The brave that died for me and you,
    So that we might live forever more,
    Beneath the flag of Red, White and Blue.

  17. Anyoldiron says:

    We will NEVER forget.

    So many gave their lives for us
    Fighting in two World Wars,
    Yet when “Peace” came at last
    We ask, “What was that war for”?
    Where is that peace we fought for?
    Did we pay to give it away
    To foreigners once more to govern us?
    Did the people ever have a say?

    We were asked once in 1975
    To remain in the then EEC,
    But what is it now in 2016
    It is nothing like we thought it would be.
    Our Common Law Constitution
    Ignored and deliberately cast aside,
    A new Flag and EU Anthem
    That no Brits can truly abide.

    Yet according to our Constitution,
    We must be free to govern our selves?
    To betray those that gave their lives for us
    Would be like living in a permanent Hell!
    We are forbidden to obey foreigners
    Our Constitution makes that quite clear,
    It is time for us to set ourselves FREE.
    By the REFERENDUM Governments fear.

Leave a Reply to Jane Davies Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s