REFERENDUM LETTERS: EEC has “snowballed” into an unwieldy dictatorship

EU flag
EU flag
5
Have your say

In the Lincolnshire Free Press on June 14, John Bland made a brilliant statement outlining the theoretical case for remaining in the European Union.

In theory, his case is unassailable, but unfortunately mankind survives by consideration of practical issues.

Three things shine through history as essentials we cannot do without and which apply to every coherent nation; independence, self-determination and democracy.

The EU is not democratic; it is largely controlled by the commissioners, who are not elected, cannot be thrown out and are answerable to no-one but themselves.

The EU is run by Eurocrats, not statesmen.

The European Economic Community (EEC), which we signed up to, has morphed into the EU, which is committed to the theory of ever closer political union.

If this is achieved, we will be effectively signing away our independence and self-determination.

There are 28 member states at the moment, and who knows how many more are to come?

Turkey? Ukraine? Chalk and cheese have much more in common than some of these. As for a political union, it’s simply not possible.

We all survive by practical considerations, of which immigration is certainly one.

Going on current numbers, the UK is accepting the population of a city the size of Newcastle every year.

We cannot properly assimilate those numbers and we need to be able to control our borders for this and for security reasons.

We are, after Germany, the second biggest contributor to the EU budget.

This is used to meet the running costs of the EU, which has a staggering 23,000 staff, of which 10,000 people are paid more than £70,000 a year.

They are people spending other people’s money, which is, in my opinion, a recipe for extravagance.

For 20 years, the accounts of the EU have not passed the auditors – there is 4.7 per cent of the budget not satisfactorily accounted for.

For many in Brussels and the outer reaches of the EU, fraud is a way of life.

Our net contribution equates to a seven per cent tariff on the goods we sell there. Whereas, if we were to leave, we would only have to pay at a three per cent rate.

The EU is committed to the formation of an EU army. This will undermine NATO, which includes the all-powerful United States of America – a vital aid to our security since the end of the Second World War.

We are outvoted in Brussels more than any other single country. How can laws made there be the best possible to suit our needs and circumstances, or the needs and circumstances of southern Europe or any other individual country?

There are so many issues to consider and so many ridiculous forecasts made by people who are less than completely honest.

If we vote to leave, there will be a gradual change over several years and we can all make whatever readjustments become necessary without panic or undue hardship.

There is a risk that our departure will cause the instability in Europe that Mr Bland fears.

My father was a surgeon in the Royal Army Medical Corps for the duration of the First World War and saw at first hand the truly dreadful results in much the same way that Mr Bland’s father endured the effects of the Second World War.

I am an optimist and believe that we have moved on. There is no reason to turn our backs on our near neighbours or that we should not co-operate whenever and wherever there is benefit to be had, but if we do vote to leave, as I shall, we will be better able to relate to the rest of the world and all our other friends, besides safeguarding our democracy, independence and right to self-determination.

Over the years, the EEC has “snowballed” into an unwieldy dictatorship governed by Eurocrats who live and prosper in their own little world, guided by their own little theories with very little real understanding of the needs and aspirations of the member countries.

John Bryant

Gosberton Clough