The Increasing Irrelevance of Continuing EU Membership

The controversial pro-EU leaflet put out by the UK government claims that continued membership of the EU will guarantee a “stronger” and “safer” UK, as if those aspects are the exclusive prerogative of that organisation - the reality could not be more glaringly different:

Improving our lives” - a reference to, as from next year, “roaming charges will be abolished across the EU, saving mobile phone users “up to 38p a minute on calls”. The EU was first asked to abolish roaming charges by a global body, the International Telephone Users Group (INTUG) way back in 1999, but it so dragged its feet that eventually INTUG approached another global body, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).  The OECD then involved another global body, the International Telecommunications Union, which used the rules of a fourth, the World Trade Organisation, to ensure that by 2013 roaming charges were being abolished right across the world - with the EU way back at the end of the queue.

Stronger in Europe” - a claim that, if we were to leave the EU, disabled people would somehow lose their rights, but these are enshrined in the 2010 Equality Act, putting into UK law the UN Convention on the Rights of the Disabled, which must be implemented by all UN-member states in any case, as the EU itself admits.

Another pro-EU organisation, the BBC, was recently having fun with a lamentably inadequate history of all those long-controversial EU regulations on the length, shape or otherwise of fruit and vegetables, such as cabbages, cucumbers and bananas.  The point it was trying to make was that Brussels had finally recognised these rules as being “a little bit daft”, and so very sensibly repealed them.  But what the BBC failed to tell us was that the reason they were all scrapped was that they have now been replaced by new standards handed down from another global body, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) based in Geneva - not in Brussels.  In many ways UNECE plays a greater part in making our laws than Brussels, over everything from marketing standards to vehicle design.

What everyone on both sides of the IN/OUT campaign has been missing, is the astonishing scale on which the making of our laws has been passed up to a global level, to scores of mysterious organisations which then hand down rulings to be implemented by lesser regional bodies, such as the EU.  Outside of that organisation, both the UK - as well as an independent Scotland! - could, as countries in their own right, directly apply for individual membership of especially the World Trade Organisation, which is already the nearest entity to being a world government.

Reasons why an independent Scotland should not be a member of the European Union

The SDA is implacably opposed to Scottish membership of the European Union (EU).  In contrast, the SNP is dangerously ignorant of the broader implications of independence that go beyond the glorified local government level that is devolution.  It is totally in hock to the so-called European Movement (Euromove) that dictates its EU-favourable policy.

Euromove was from the beginning a creation of the American Office of Strategic Services (OSS), invented by OSS head, William “Wild Bill” Donovan, just after the Second World War, and continued by its successor the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) when Frank G. Wisner was head of clandestine operations there; Euromove being funded by that body as well as through the American Committee for a United Europe (ACUE), which was, from the beginning, financed by US intelligence as well as by the likes of the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations and other agencies with close contacts to the US Administration.  The EU is, therefore, an American driven development, and it is still American policy to keep it under US control.  Papers revealing those facts were discovered among recently released material by a researcher at Georgetown University, one of the top Ivy League universities in the US.  The ongoing negotiations being carried out, mostly in secret, between the US and the EU to set up a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is just the logical extension of what master spy Donovan started after 1945; an arrangement if it receives legislative authority will amount to the end of democracy as we know it, and lead to the dictatorship of American turbo capitalism.

It is essential that the eyes of the SNP membership are opened to the manner in which the European Movement (so-called) has pulled the wool over the eyes of the SNP leadership.  The British used to do that with potential political leaderships in the dominions, especially India.  Young maharajahs were educated at Eton and Oxbridge in order to pull them into the English establishment and thereby keep them and their country under control.  Euromove has done exactly the same with the SNP and other Scottish parties for years on end by offering them prestigious active and representational positions to give them the illusion that they are doing something important.

It is a little known fact that 80% of EU “legislation” is simply taken over from institutions higher up the global order and presented as the EU’s own.  One of the hardest facts is that non EU, but European Free Trade Association (EFTA) members, Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and even tiny Liechtenstein have far more decision making clout than any EU member.   The reason being that they have voting power in their own right in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and a huge number of similar global institutions where the real decisions are made before being taken over by the sub regional EU, which has no power to alter them.  EU member states do not have this right to protect their own interests, because they are bound by the EU "common policies" rule that obliges them to support a single EU policy line at the higher decision making level within a whole range of global institutions.  And that single EU policy will not be formulated for the benefit of the smaller member states if that is not in line with the interests of Germany and France.

Only one of the five major European institutions is basically free of US domination, i.e., the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, which forced the recall of Scotland's Parliament and Government at the instigation of the Scotland-UN Committee, the SDA's predecessor.

Over Last 5 Years - Scotland would have been better of as an independent country.

Figures confirm that Scotland would have been £8.3 billion better off as an independent country : Business for Scotland (Report, 12th February, 2016)
Over the past 5 years Scotland’s would have been £8.3 billion better off as an independent country, when taking account a new report published into Scotland’s finances.

The new report demonstrates that Scotland generated £800 more in tax per person than the UK average during the last financial year.  Scotland’s spending was also lower than the UK average over the past 5 years.  Scotland’s spending was 44.2% of GDP over the last 5 years. The UK average was 45.4%.  Spending on social security last year was also lower in Scotland than the UK average. In Scotland it was 15.5% of GDP compared to 16% for the UK.

The front page of The Herald reported that Scotland’s economy is 11% better off in terms of GDP per capita than the UK.

The Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland Report continues 33 years of strong performances by the Scottish economy. Had Scotland been an independent country, it would currently have a net cash surplus of over £50 billion and no public debt.

Scotland’s economic position, relative to the UK finances, would have been £8.3 billion better off in the past 5 years alone. Scotland is clearly a wealthy nation with the resources to be a successful independent country.

Scotland is one of the world’s wealthiest countries
This means that an independent Scotland will be one of the world’s wealthiest countries.

Independence can make Scotland better off
However, without the full economic powers of independence Scotland cannot grow its economy, support domestic businesses or improve its economic competitiveness.
The extra £8.3 billion over the past 5 years would have allowed a Scottish Government to increase investment, reduce tax for key growth sectors and reduce overall government debt.  In contrast, Westminster has created a crisis in public finances with total debts of £1.3 trillion.
Westminster costs included in figures
Despite the strength of these figures, they still contain a number of substantial ‘Westminster costs’ which are placed on Scotland.

Scotland had to pay £4.02 billion in debt interest last year to Westminster. This is despite the fact that Westminster ran up this substantial debt. As a report by the Reid Foundation and the Fiscal Commission confirmed, an independent Scotland would not have needed this debt. This has cost Scotland £68.12 billion.

The Scottish figures also include service charges for spending outside of Scotland. This includes substantial costs for military services and nuclear weapons. Scotland also pays for the large civil service bureaucracy based in London. Scotland has paid £15.8 billion for military costs over the past 5 years, which will have been increased by the war in Iraq.

Scotland also has to contribute to the UK’s £3.5 billion tax administration costs,  £1.5 billion border control costs and hundreds of millions in Westminster expenses. Through efficiencies and common sense, an independent Scotland can save money in these areas and improve the economy. This will provide a large independence dividend.

SDA Donation

Please consider making a donation to assist the Scottish Democratic Alliance


Login Form