This is a rather long reply I posted on UKIPS Roger Helmer’s blog just now, which I thought I’d share with you.
You can read Roger’s original post and replies here:
My initial response to Roger was:
So basically only 1% want’s what UKIP wants which is to leave, never mind the consequences. Thanks for another pro EU post Roger and a thumbs up to what little Cameron hopes to achieve. Let’s face it, just by tweaking the question in a poll or referendum just a little bit you can get any result you want.
As usual the comments section is the real interesting thing about Roger’s blog. I usually skip the ukip sycophants that praise Rogers common sense. Interspersed we see the more ‘well read’ Eurosceptic replies. This time commenter David Lonsdale caught my attention. I just block quote a very small section here concerning ukip’s ‘Great EU conspiracy’ which he copied from Professor Sked.
“Macmillan left Edward Heath to take matters forward, and Heath, along with Douglas Hurd, arranged — according to the Monnet papers — for the Tory Party to become a (secret) corporate member of Monnet’s Action Committee for a United States of Europe.”
I leave you with my reply, which is now my thought of the day for you:
“That’s a nice bit of plagiarism copied from your nutty Professor Skidmark or whatever his name is, but like all conspiracy theories it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
The flaw in the thinking behind his polemic is to subtly sneak it into our head that big supra-national government is always bad, National(listic) government infinitely preferable, because they give us all this wonderful growth with infinitely adaptable economic policies, which like like Goldilocks porridge, will be ‘just right’ for the UK.
Anne Palmer (see comment below) stumbles much closer to the truth when she says ‘National Governments are pointless’. They increasingly are in this globalised world.
I’ll give you a simple example: The way national governments tax their citizens on income is a huge mess. I know because I’ve paid tax in UK, Netherlands, Belgium and France. Over decades governments of the day introduce so many loop holes and exceptions that you need expensive tax lawyers to navigate through the morass. Simple citizens just pay up and shut up. Ultra rich people pay nothing, apart from their expensive tax advisors. Countries like France put paper forms dating back to the fifties on-line and call that e-progress. People fill these huge colourful forms in on-line, only to print them off and for some other bugger to type it all in again, mistakes and all.
So this leads me to make my point in case: I’d rather have one expensive but well thought out simple EU tax return, rather than having to deal with the stupidity and national quirks of 28 member states. So ok, to build such a system would take years and it would probably overrun cost estimates three times before it was delivered like all EU projects; but still the result would be infinitely better than 28 individual nonsense system like the French one I discussed. This is just one small repeatable example. We could do this for VAT returns, government requests for statistics on trade, you name it. One system replaces 28.
So I say bring it on, let’s have more EU, let’s have less waste in national governments doing redundant things and please stop pretending, if one part of the EU is doing a bit better than the other, that it was because of their nationalistic government serving porridge that was ‘just right’.
It’s EU business people that create wealth, not the likes of Cameron and Osborne, not Juncker or Timmermans, certainly not UKIP’S beer swilling Nigel Farage and clueless climate change denier Roger Helmer.
And you know which country would benefit most from building all these simplified super efficient EU wide systems? It would be the British service companies and IT professionals, because at least that’s one thing we’re rather good at.”