Skip to main content

Questions for Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt

by | Thursday, 27th June 2019
If we do get to Brexit on 31 October will this truly achieve “taking back control”, as the original referendum intended?

The answer here does depend on which sort of Brexit we end up with:

a) No Brexit but a decision to Remain would be a disaster as we would have recovered nothing back under our control and left the door wide open for the European Commission to encroach ever further on our autonomy and Sovereignty. Quite literally it would be like the sky falling in on the last of vestiges of our independent nationality and national aspiration.

b) The May Plan, if that was revived, would produce a result very little different from Remain principally because it does not prevent or obstruct the upcoming initiatives intended by Brussels which I have referred to in a) above.

The only certain way of a clean Brexit, unless its very threat should encourage some better concessions from the European Commission, would be to go for a complete No Deal Brexit on 31 October. This would have the effect of blocking or terminating virtually all of the hazards which I will outline on the basis that British citizens will wish to know how far taking back control can be taken to ensure the restored integrity and permanence of our Constitutional rights which have already been so severely damaged by our existing membership and the Treaty of Lisbon dated 13 December 2007 as already occurred; also the protection of the independence of our own internal and international security alliance upon our Armed Forces and the ability to resist the further interference and imposition of impending and imminent further strictures to be placed upon us by the European Commission relating to fiscal and monetary control and conduct of our legal and court processes.

Why has the Constitution got anything to do with this?

This is a huge question. We need to recall that Britain is governed by a Constitutional Monarchy which means that the entire government of the country and the making of its laws and conduct of its courts are all the absolute right and authority of the reigning Monarch. On Accession to the throne each new monarch gives a life-long undertaking to place their entire power of government exclusively into the hands of the elected people i.e. the Government. This power given to the Government is omniscient in exercising the power to govern and may do so ever as it wishes with one single exception. This exception is that no Government has the power to reduce or diminish its own omniscience. And Government seriously breached this overriding command when it agreed to the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon in 2007 because it took away the UK Government’s right of veto on any decisions passed down by the European Commission. According to our Constitution, Parliament (House of Commons and House of Lords) should have intervened later to reverse the diminution of the government’s power and has never done so, which means in turn, that we have left Our Sovereign Lady Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II in breach of Her power to maintain the ultimate, absolute authority of Parliament as confirmed in Her Coronation Oath.

“Taking back control” should be seen to repair that damage once and for all so that we might eliminate completely a risk that the Sovereign would feel obliged to abdicate in accordance with Her broken oath and this in turn would preclude any succession to the throne as the same consideration would apply to any new Sovereign.

Our Constitution also ensures the UK Government has the power to issue all appropriate laws and to ensure that these are applied and conducted through the proper Court authorities. The European Commission believes that it alone should control laws throughout the EU and that our courts and legal proceedings should be subordinate to their ruling.

“Taking back control” by a No Deal break would ensure the continued integrity and authority of our Constitution by protecting the Monarchy, sustaining the authority of our Parliamentary process and allowing for the continuation of justice and compliance for the laws of the land none of which could be achieved or restored unless we have an absolute and clean break from the European Commission as in No Deal Brexit.

What new impositions may the European Commission have in mind for interference in our national life?

The answer to this: the European Commission has it in mind to introduce a series of initiatives which will prejudice our independence and national life which are not precluded by the May agreement and will certainly be the European Commission’s right to pursue in the event of Remain. These include particularly:

i) The establishment of Qualified Majority Voting which means that we would lose any right as a continuing member of the EU to refuse any new law or condition they wish to impose if we were a minority or part of a larger minority of member states; in other words they can command us to do anything they like.

ii) The EU have also made it clear they wish to return to a second attempt to make the Euro the only established currency for the EU despite the fact this is seen by experts as a major contributor to the financial crash in 2008; thus the pound sterling would vanish and we would be back to the Euro with no alternative. But,

iii) A return to the Euro would be backed by the imposition of Fiscal Unity on Europe as a whole which would mean there would be one central European bank which would rule upon its entire financial structure which would be controlled by levels of taxation for all countries, centralisation of all revenue and tax collections, and the ability to use this cash to shore up the financial shortfalls of any country regardless of the source of the funds being used to pay for their own economic problems. Effectively, this would establish and impose the principle of Taxation Without Representation which has long been recognised as a serious and detrimental imposition being set by strong nations on the weak which would become Britain’s position.

So, what is this thing called the EUDU?

This stands for the European Defence Union which has been most inadequately recognised as to its implications for the UK by a surprising silence and absence of comment amongst both the media and political voices, yet it seems to have been in prospect for a number of years and Tony Blair was recently recorded at a Security Conference in Munich as welcoming the imminent final creation of the EUDU and claiming to be one of the earliest proponents and supporters of this idea.

a) Indeed, it does seem as though the EUDU will move towards its full establishment as soon as the UK is either persuaded to remain or some other means can be established to trap us into its collective defence combining the various and not insubstantial defence forces of EU members.

b) This would entail, and no voice from the EUDU is heard to deny this, that the UK will allow for the entire absorption of its entire security and defence forces – Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force, together with all their military assets – ships, tanks, aircraft etc. But worse still, there appears to be a stated intention by the EUDU they will also absorb and take control of the entire Command and Control structures and strategy as to when and where such would be located. and the UK would not be allowed any voice in this, despite presumably being still required to pay the bill for the Forces of which they have been deprived.

c) Not the least concern here would be that this initiative might also anticipate the entire transfer of our nuclear deterrent Trident fleet and with it our exclusion from the EU’s own control and ownership of the Doomsday button. This would completely ignore the implication that Trident entails the use under separate Treaty of key USA weapon technology which the USA might have the immediate right to terminate.

d) As the EU is proposing a single Foreign Office function under a single Foreign Affairs Commissioner this would again preclude the UK from any decision as to the use of our former fighting forces or the resolution of any international disputes which might affect us. Consider, for example, how this might have worked in 1815, 1914-18, 1939-45, if we had no right to participate in the unfolding of international affairs in which our own fighting forces would play a role and so many of our countrymen had died.

So, perhaps above all else, it is in this matter of national security and military independence that we need to move most urgently and most confidently in ensuring we do truly take back control and restore our confident national unity and independence. The alternative is likely to be an early and probably televised ceremony at which our two proud new Aircraft Carriers, HMS Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales, along with our 6 type II Destroyers, are seen to be handed over to the care of the EU as they sail for the last time from Portsmouth to Hamburg.

Yes, it is, most emphatically the time “to take back control”, the electorate voted for it and there is no time to be lost. Deal or No Deal, let us do it on 31 October.

e) It is already being stated by the EU that the EUDU is intended also to take control of our own intelligence services such as MI6 and GCHQ for integration with other European intelligence services, if any?! Which would almost certainly mean destruction of the Five Eyes International Intelligence Network, comprising the UK and the USA with other key intelligence bodies, but which would be most unlikely to continue to agree with what is considered a leaky European bunch.

Help the UK Column by becoming a member: