As a lay person with no political experience I have been asked by this site to give some balance with regard to the downsides of the EU the Euro and E&MU.

I have taken the opportunity to select some quotes in the first instance
from other sites which I have included at the end.

I would like to take this opportunity to say that most people who are anti EU are not anti European, there is no xenophobia merely a desire to retain a financial legal and free society which has been successful for many years as an independent sovereign nation.

Trade agreements throughout Europe as with the rest of the world make a great deal of sense and have always existed. A common currency may appear initially to have merit, but common currency can not be achieved without centralised economic and political union. This means that an individual county's sovereignty must be surrendered.

Large business and fund managers may well push for EMU as a good idea, we have to consider why. Fund managers in the city have to consider stock picking risk, will the stocks chosen rise or fall within a given period?
Currently they also have to deal with currency fluctuations as well, even if they pick the correct stock, any fluctuations in currency movements could still mean that they make a loss. Therefore the single currency helps them do their job more effectively because one of the risks is removed, they gamble with improved odds. This does not mean however that because they like the idea for their own gain that it is a good idea for Britain or the rest of us. Big business like the idea of a single currency because currently a company may have plants and dealerships in each of the EU countries working in many currencies. EMU means that they can centralise and rationalise, closing plants, dealerships and reduce the number of distribution bases thereby reducing their running costs and becoming more profitable. Sounds great, but what does this mean for us? Less jobs and higher unemployment as these companies reduce their manpower.
Should we accept that because big business say its a good idea for them then it must be true for us. Even big business may suffer, as many have holding accounts in foreign currencies like the Euro, Dollar, Yen, DM etc.. and make substantial parts of their profits by moving currencies.

The British government seem to be trying to sell the currency on the back of lower interest rates. It is a well known fact that more property is owned in the UK than throughout the rest of the EU and or Europe. Lower interest rates therefore would be a nice tonic. If lower interest rates are good for the economy then the UK government should reduce them now, today. The fact is that they wont because there are wider implications namely being able to control inflation the value of our currency and employment.

The other most obvious option left available would be tax. Higher taxes
reduce inflation, as tax is to be harmonised then our taxation decisions over time will centralise to Brussels.
How can the economics of the poorest eastern European country entering the EU be the same as the UK or Germany or France? It can't, therefore, how can one Economic policy work across the whole region with any element of fairness let alone common sense? It is not only the concept of the economic might of Britain, Germany etc.. and the economic poverty of Portugal, Rumania, Estonia etc..that must be considered, what about the pure size relationship of France VS Malta, Germany VS Luxembourg.

Why don't we trade freely with trade agreements but keep our monetary, economic and legal systems separate?
We trade massively with America, India, Australia etc. and they do not seek to control us.

The current legal system in place in the UK is one that the British people are very proud of. It respects our freedoms and our individuality, we are innocent until proven guilty, the burden of proof
is on the state to prove that some one is guilty. We accept that this is a
fair system, we have a jury system where in court you are judged by our peers. We have an absolute right of 'Habeas Corpus' whereby the police nor the state can incarcerate one without charge or evidence without publicly shown consent It is being changed. Corpus Juris is being forced upon the British people. This means that our right of trial by jury will disappear over time. The Corpus Juris system places the burden of proof on the individual under an inquisitorial system. A good example of the difference in the two systems can be seen in the different ways that Linford Christie and Douggie Brown are currently being dealt with, e.g. They have both been found with traces of mandorlome in their blood. UK Athletics being advised by UK lawyers and using the UK legal system have investigated, considered the evidence and come to a decision of not guilty (can not be proved beyond reasonable doubt). However the IOC are still considering the case, they do not accept the UK Athletics finding of innocence because the
burden of proof changes under this system to make the individual prove their innocence. This example clearly explains why the British people would want to hang on to a fairer judicial system proven to work.

Further under British Common Law once the State has failed to prove your guilt in Court you can never be tried again for the same alleged offence 'Double Jeopardy' which is doubly entrenched in British Law and no Parliament can legally set aside (Bill of Rights)- This is not so under Corpus Juris.

A look at the wording in the Corpus Juris document should concern all UK citizens, it states that it will provide ' a better system of REPRESSION' . We fought two world wars this century to avoid being repressed, and this is the intention of a new legal system being introduced.!

Another fact is that the UK have greater funding across all of its pension schemes than the rest of Europe put together. An understandable concern is therefore that if we the British have been more sensible in our pension planning whilst the rest of Europe are looking at a pensions time bomb,is how an economic union would affect our pocket. And those of the elderly in the long term. How can Europe look after its retiring population? Increases in tax would seem to be the favourite option, if tax is harmonised across the EU then would that not mean the UK funding our neighbours pensions shortcomings, and eventually paying tax twice over for our own pensions? What pension provisions have been made by former Yugoslavia, Greece, Rumania, Poland etc..?

How can we explain EMU in simplistic terms. Below is a friends explanationm which I think works well.

Economic and Monetary Union E & M U.

I have monetary union with my next door neighbour i.e. we use the same currency which we use to pay our bills and meet our commitments.

I have Economic Union with my wife i.e. she runs up the credit cards bills etc. and I am equally liable to pay them. This I can just about live with.

I would not however, be happy if I suddenly had to start paying for my next door neighbour's credit cards as a result of economic union with him.

Some quotes:

DID YOU KNOW that several prominent public figures have been outspoken on Economic and Monetary Union ?


ON THE SINGLE MARKET


Jacques Delors, former European Commission President, quoted in Commission publication: 'From Single Market to European Union', 1992

"Europe cannot attain political union... ...unless it is in control of its
economic destiny. That is why we need an organised economic area.


Michael Heseltine MP and former Deputy Prime Minister

"...the Single Market is over-regulated, over-protected over-centralised. We now have Eurosclerosis, we burden our businesses with extra costs,
preventing labour markets from working properly". (1994)


Katie Wood, Travel Editor, The Sun, 16.5.98 "Scrapping duty free will throw 23,000 British jobs down the drain"

One thing is for sure though. The Eurocrats in Brussels will not have to
worry about losing their own cheap booze. For under the Vienna Conventions, EU officials and embassy staff will still be allowed to buy goods at duty free prices.


ON THE SINGLE CURRENCY

Giscard d'Estaing and Helmut Schmidt, former French & German leaders, quoted in International Herald Tribune, 14.10.97

One must never forget that monetary union, which the two of us were the first to propose more than a decade ago is ultimately a political project. It aims to give a new impulse to the historic movement towards union of the European states. Monetary union is a federative project that needs to be accompanied and followed by other steps."

Hans Tietmeyer, German Bundesbank President, quoted in Bill Jamieson's Britain a Global Future, 1997

A European Currency will lead to member nations transferring their
sovereignty over financial and wage policies as well as in monetary affairs. It is an illusion to think that states can hold onto their autonomy over taxation policies'

Napoleon Bonaparte, who integrated Europe by force, with a comment of possible relevance to the authority of the European Central Bank that will run the Single Currency (1815):

When a government is dependent for money upon bankers, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.


William Rees-Mogg, The Times, 29.4.98

The Euro is being sold to the British people rather successfully at present, by bogus argument that used to belong to the Marxists, that of historical inevitability....

...The Nazis used the same propaganda. They believed in the triumph of the will of dictatorship over the weak confusion of democracy. The
'thousand-year Reich' lasted twelve years. So much for inevitability.

Martin Feldstein, Professor of Economics, Harvard University

Monetary Union is not needed to achieve the advantages of a free trade zone. On the contrary an artificially contrived monetary union might actually reduce the volume of trade and would certainly increase the level of unemployment" (1992)

Instead of increasing intra-European harmony and global peace, the shift to EMU and political integration that would follow it would be more likely to lead to increased conflicts within Europe and between Europe and the United States". (Foreign Affairs, Nov/Dec 1997)


Eddie George, Bank of England Governor, The Sun, 3.4.98

I don't believe we are talking about the whole thing blowing up, but my view is it will cause quite serious tensions....


Henry Kissinger, former US Secretary of State, The Sun, 8.5.98

It is difficult to see how monetary union can succeed....


Mike Lazenby, Director of Britain's largest building society, the
Nationwide: The Sun, 28.5.98

"It is a myth that entry will bring cheaper mortgages... ...there is nothing to say that joining EMU [the euro] will push mortgages down to European levels - we could see them rise slightly in the short term"


ON THE ISSUE OF BRITAIN'S MEMBERSHIP OF THE EU & EMU


Sir Peter Marshall, KCMG, address at Royal Commonwealth Society, 23.3.98

Hence if the EU has to be sold to the British public, the economic arguments have to be very delicately balanced. It is necessary to be "economical with the truth"


David Smith, Economics Editor, Sunday Times, in Eurofutures on the UK Single Currency 'opt-out'

Or more correctly, the freedom to 'opt in' at a time of its choosing...


Adair Turner, CBI Director General, quoted by Freedom Today, Aug/Sept 1998

The European public has not been fully prepared for the likely impact of monetary union. I think they've been given given false assurances that EMU itself will directly create jobs and cure unemployment - an assertion without intellectual justification

Roy Denman, former Commission representative in Washington, to an
essentially American readership - International Herald Tribune, 14.10.98

[on EMU] "By that time (2002) a new entrant will be required to accept not just a single currency but a degree of harmonisation of fiscal and economic policy toward political union that the British electorate might not stomach"

"The essential difficulty is that no British government has ever been frank with its people about Europe. Robert Schuman, on May 9, 1950, spoke of "economic development as a first step in the federation of Europe". This is what the European adventure has been about.


Janet Bush, Economics Editor, The Times (1996)

Could Britain survive outside [the EMU system]?
...Yes, and would probably thrive
Webmaster's note: The Economic & Monetary Union system is the 'heart' of Europe's domination of Britain


This has been an attempt to give reasoned arguments against the EU without being extreme there are many more if you want other views the following website may be of some help www.iits.dircon.co.uk/newalliance/fasti.htm

Gerald Archer
Top