2016-05-10 Liam Fox: A European army is a vanity project that would sap our strength
That last part is what the remainiacs consistently fail to grasp. Their generally limited intellects mean they tend to think of everything in black and white, with "in" meaning cooperation and "out" isolation.
But we can cooperate with European countries perfectly well once out of the EU, as we have for ages before it was ever thought of, and in the unlikely event that petty EU vindictiveness compromises this after an exit then was it something ever worth being in anyway?
:::
In an era of globalisation, with enormous new opportunities, we are locked into a backward and inward looking political model designed in the 1950s and executed by bureaucrats and a political class seemingly indifferent to either the wishes or needs of their citizens.
We have witnessed a generation of young Europeans having their hopes for the future sacrificed on the altar of the single currency with all the social tensions that this will produce.
Despite our wise decision not to join the euro, our economic and trading interests are compromised by our proximity to this inherently flawed and ultimately doomed project.
The relentless pursuit of a pan-EU diplomatic service, exacerbated by the willingness of successive British governments to shrink the size of the FCO has reduced our overseas footprint, undiluted our influence at a time of unprecedented global opportunity.
It is completely clear, to any remotely objective observer, that any talk of “a reformed EU” is a lie. Not only is the direction of travel firmly towards the goal of ever closer union but the EU is increasingly taking on the trappings of statehood.
Yet the decision we have to take on the 23rd June is much more profound than simply our membership of the European Union itself. The crucial question is this – do we believe that a supranational body is an appropriate vehicle for prosperity, stability and security in the 21st century? I do not.
I believe in international institutions not a supranational one. I want cooperation with our partners and allies where it is in our mutual interest to do so. However, I believe in keeping separate the instruments by which we can pursue Britain’s independent national interests in a world where to do so will require flexibility and agility. The EU is a drag on our national aspirations.
In an era of globalisation, with enormous new opportunities, we are locked into a backward and inward looking political model designed in the 1950s and executed by bureaucrats and a political class seemingly indifferent to either the wishes or needs of their citizens.
We have witnessed a generation of young Europeans having their hopes for the future sacrificed on the altar of the single currency with all the social tensions that this will produce.
Despite our wise decision not to join the euro, our economic and trading interests are compromised by our proximity to this inherently flawed and ultimately doomed project.
The relentless pursuit of a pan-EU diplomatic service, exacerbated by the willingness of successive British governments to shrink the size of the FCO has reduced our overseas footprint, undiluted our influence at a time of unprecedented global opportunity.
It is completely clear, to any remotely objective observer, that any talk of “a reformed EU” is a lie. Not only is the direction of travel firmly towards the goal of ever closer union but the EU is increasingly taking on the trappings of statehood.
Yet the decision we have to take on the 23rd June is much more profound than simply our membership of the European Union itself. The crucial question is this – do we believe that a supranational body is an appropriate vehicle for prosperity, stability and security in the 21st century? I do not.
I believe in international institutions not a supranational one. I want cooperation with our partners and allies where it is in our mutual interest to do so. However, I believe in keeping separate the instruments by which we can pursue Britain’s independent national interests in a world where to do so will require flexibility and agility. The EU is a drag on our national aspirations.
But we can cooperate with European countries perfectly well once out of the EU, as we have for ages before it was ever thought of, and in the unlikely event that petty EU vindictiveness compromises this after an exit then was it something ever worth being in anyway?
Comment