Britain and Europe

The Culture of Deceit

2001

Contents

Part 3-Mr Macmillan and 1961

Part 4-Mr Heath and 1970

Part 5-Mrs Thatcher and 1985

Part 6-From Major to Blair, Maastricht to Nice

Part 7-The price we have paid

*

PART 1-Preface

The purpose of this paper is to explore the fundamental reason why our involvement with 'Europe'has introduced into our politics a

CULTURE OF DECEIT

which is quite new in our history, not least by obscuring the scale on which it is changing the entire way in which our country is now governed.

In the light of the European Union now making the final moves towards

POLITICAL INTEGRATION

it is particularly urgent that the nature of this culture of concealment should be analysed and more widely understood.

END OF PART 1

*

PART 2

The Strange Case of the Werner Report

It is not often a British Prime Minister remains active in politics long enough to be caught out by secret papers released under the 30-year rule from the time he was in office. But such is the case in January 2001 when the Public Record Office at Kew opened files relating to Edward Heath's application to join the [so-called] Common Market  in 1970

FULL ECONOMIC AND MONETARY UNION

As luck would have it, his confidential report began circulating in Brussels in Ovctober 1970, just as Britain's negotiations to enter the [so called]

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY

were getting under way.

In the British Foreign Office, as we can see, the Werner Report rang fearful alarm bells. A secret briefing note to Mr Heath from Con O'Neill, the senior civil servant responsible for Europe, explained that, if implemented, Werner's proposals would have enormous poltical repercussions. They envisaged " a process of fundamental political importance, implying progressive development towards a

POLITICAL UNION

The long-term objectives of

ECONOMIC AND MONETARY UNION

It was made clear to Mr Heath,

"are very far-reaching indeed"

going"well beyond the full establishment of a

COMMON MARKET"

The Werner plan could lead to

The only real concern of Mr Heath and his [traitorous] colleagues was that this plan should not be tal;ked about too openly in prublic, because this might so inflame public opinion that it would be much harder to persuade Parliamnment and the British people that it was in their interests to join what they were being assured was

NO MORE THAN A 'COMMON MARKET'

intended to boost trade.

It was vital, Mr Rippon [a fellow conspiritor and  Nazi Spy part of a ring of traitors at Baliol Colleage,Oxford in 1938].that this goal of political and economic union should be achieved only in a [form of gradualism]

 "step by step approach"

because

" it was natural for people to be afraid of change"

and

"part of his problem in Britain was to reassure people that their [justified] fears were unjustified"

When these documents were released 30 years later in 2001, this was confirmed by a retired Foreign Office official Sir Crispin Tickell, who had played an intemate part in Britain's Common Market negotiations as Geoffrey Rippon's private secretary and was present at the meetings with Werner, in a BBC interview Tickell frankly adnmitted that, although worries over

had been" very much present in the mind of the negotiators", the line had been   "the less they came out in the open the better".

All too often we see them announcing new policies or laws which pretend are our own, only for it to emerge that they are merely passing edicts from the EU.

Again and again we see them having to conceal just how much of the power to run our [YOUR!] country has been

GIVEN AWAY

to  a new system of government which has no particular concern for

THE INTERSTS OF THE PEOPLE OF BRITAIN

[ENGLAND].

But ultimately this CULTURE of CONCEALMENT, which is far more prevalent to Britian than any other country in Europe, derives from that same basic act of

DECEPTION:

the pretence that the nature of the 'European project' is something different from

WHAT IT IS.

*

TO FOLLOW:

*

[The English people have been too trusting of their duplicitous politicians as the above article has clearly shown. Even after43 years since the Accession Treaty of 1972 which came into effect  on  Its January 1973 we are only now in 2016 seeing any real opposition to any further involvement in the monstrosity calling itself the European Union which is now facing a challenge from many patriots in once free countries of people's who were also BETRAYED by their POLITICIANS and now demand back their once

FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATES.

The moment when our political leaders first took this FATEFUL DECISION to CONCEAL the REAL PURPOSE of the EUROPEAN PROJECT from the BRITISH people was NOT, IN FACT, 1970 but TEN YEARS EARLIER when , in 1960, Harold Macmillan's Government began discussing the dramatic reversal of NATIONAL POLICY which was to lead to our FIRST ABORTIVE APPLICATION to join the [supposed] COMMON MARKET.

This we can see from an illuminating book published in 1995 by Lionel Bell, The Throw That  Failed, based on studying Cabinet papers which reflected those discussions in the month's leading to our application in the summer of 1961.  What was striking about the documents Bell uncovered was just how frank Macmillan and his colleagues had been in private, even at that early stage, over where the COMMON MARKET was heading. They were in little doubt it was intended to be just a

FIRST STEP towards eventual POLITICAL and ECONOMIC UNION.

YET THIS THEY DECIDED SHOULD BE KEPT HIDDEN FROM THE BRITISH PEOPLE.

because otherwise

IT WOULD NOT BE ACCEPTABLE

The Common Market had to be presented as

NO MORE THAN A TRADING ARRANGEMENT.

Even before the Treaty of Rome had been signed in 1957, the

FOREIGN OFFICE!

had been briefed to the effect that its six original signatures wanted:

" to achieve tighter European integration through the creation of European institutions with supranational powers in the economic field... the underlying motive of the Six, however, essentially political;". (PRO/FO 371/150360. Bell op.cit.p.1

In the summer of 1960, when British entry was first being actively discussed behind closed doors, Sir Roderick Barclay, head of the UK delegation to the European Commission in Brussels, sent a despatch to the Foreign Office stressing, in Mr Bell's words.

"that the aim of the Community was not merely harmonisation but  the unification of policies in every field of the economic union. i. e. economic policy, commercial policy, tariff policy and fiscal policy. That this was not just pie in the sky [it] needed to be made clear to the politicians". (based on PRO/FO 371/150363,Bell p.220

When Edward Heath, Minister of State for Europe

 ESSENTIAL HALLMARK of any 'STATE' (and he regarded the EEC as a POTENTIAL 'STATE')

It would be necessary, Hallstein insisted, for any new entrant to accept the principle that the EEC was intended to evolve into something much deeper, "some form of

FEDERAL STATE"

which was what the Commission was working towards (PRO/FO 371/150369).

Particularly revealing in this context was a reply given in December 1960  the

 vLord Chancellor , Lord Kilmuir, to a request from

 MrHEATH

EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE

(PRO/FO 371/15039,Bell pp.36-9)

On the making of laws, Kilmuir said it was clear that:

AS for the subordination of Britain's courts to the European Court of Justice, Kilmuir wrote:

These are pretty direct warnings. And when in summer of 1961 the Cabinet finally considered whether to apply for entry, Mr Macmillan opened the discussion by pointing out that the first question they needed to consider was that

Macmillan conceded that a decision to go in would "raise great presentational difficulties". On the one hand, it would be important to convince the Six that "we genuinely supported the objectives of the Treaty". On the other:"

[The surrender to the Nazi-planned EU of 1940 and 1943 in their Geopolitical centre in Madrid-Spain-

TO BE CONTINUED