I AM writing in reply to David Firth’s comments on the European Union.
First of all he seems to imply that eurosceptics have a "monopoly over public information”. Although most newspapers are fairly eurosceptic, the BBC is certainly pro-European.
Britain has already lost control of its borders, as can be seen in the unregulated immigration from the EU that we have seen in recent years. The draft reform Treaty states. "[The EU] shall ensure the absence of internal border controls for persons and shall frame a common policy on asylum, immigration and external border control".
If Mr Firth is in favour of an EU presidency does he not think it should be elected by the EU Parliament?
The Reform Treaty will create a federal Europe. It gives the EU competence in, amongst other things: foreign policy, defence, customs union, common commercial policy, internal market, agriculture, fisheries, environment, transport, energy, security and justice (including immigration), employment, social policies, health, industry, culture, tourism, education.
I am not interested been a "major player on the world stage" or becoming part of a "counterweight to the United States and China". Instead I favour a policy of heavily armed neutrality, trade with all comers, and peacekeeping under the authority of the UN.
Duran O’Dwyer, MPhys, Physics with Space Technology.
It seems there is much confusion about the nature of the European Union and especially regarding the implications of the new reform Treaty (David Firth's opinion and comments). The newly adopted Reform Treaty will not create a federal Europe; Britain can continue to keep drawing its 'red lines' to its heart's content. As the CER report on the Reform Treaty states 'it was Britain that made the strongest demands during the negotiations - and secured everything it wanted.' However, this is to the detriment of our influence within the Union that we apparently so strongly wish to shape to our own 'good British values.' By pandering to the Europsceptic culture within Britain our country will end up isolated within the Union and unable to shape the EU agenda as we so wish - it is strategically unsound.
'Enhanced cooperation' decision-making processes imply that those reluctant members such as Britain and Denmark can continue to placate their Eurosceptic public and medias with opt-outs, because in such a large (and expanding) EU there has been a shift away from unanimity or even Qualified Majority Voting towards a more flexible policy process. The more enthusiastic members can plough ahead with policy design while we maintain our autonomy. We will end up as an isolated member in a two-tier Europe, forced to eventually adopt policies on which we have had little say, because we were not part of the decision-making process. The Euro is the most striking illustration of our ability to opt-out followed by our decline in influence due to this fact.
So don't worry Eurosceptics, we will maintain our red lines, even if the best way to influence the EU agenda and successfully bring home policies that are beneficial to the UK is through engagement with the Union and not evasion of all possible EU controls to pacify our ignorant media. We are not leaving the Union so we need to utilise it for our gain, that is the nature of the Union itself. As Tony Blair complained about the acute restraint upon Britain's EU strategy, 'It's Isolation or Treason.'