THE ROAD AHEAD

Enough and more has been said and written since June last year when by a slim majority we voted to leave the European Union.  Since then the differences between us and them have been raked over ad nauseam, and there are many more to come.

I voted to leave, not on a whim, but because I was fed up with the way the Union was being mismanaged by a battery of civil servants who cared little for the greater good, and more for their seat on the gravy train of pensions and perks.

There were, and remain, three areas of concern, and judging from Boris Johnson’s centrefold spread in the Sunday Times, I am not alone.  Immigration remains a major concern for many.  There are too many immigrants with little or no control over their numbers.  We are already overcrowded, with an infrastructure designed for a population of 10 million less than we have today, and it’s getting worse. Vast swathes of the green belt will be trampled afoot to build more and more houses that most prospective occupants cannot afford.  Vast swathes of green belt will be uprooted for more and more motorways, increasing congestion and pollution. And vast swathes of green belt will disappear under expensive and unaffordable rail links to get passengers from London to Leeds saving as much as 40 minutes on the journey!  Yippee Doo! It’s called progress.  These problems are exacerbated by the fact that we don’t have joined-up government. Too much grandstanding and not enough thought for the greater good.  It bodes ill.

I am also concerned about the competence of the European Courts which do not inspire confidence, either in their composition or in their delivery.  The Court of  Human Rights has made itself the object of ridicule with some of its judgments.  We all remember the case of the Jamaican Yardie who couldn’t be deported because he had a cat which had formed a close bond with him, and there are others too many to mention. In many cases, these judgments grate with the English Common Law, which has been around for centuries and tried and tested.  Europe has no common law, so their judgments are a miss-mash of the best and the worst of 27 countries seeking a common legal identity which they will never have.

The European Court of Justice, which the European Union wants to impose on us for ever and a day, has an equally patchy record and has little to commend it. Positively the worst that can be said about it is that it is self-regulating and so free from political control.  Whilst I agree wholeheartedly with the independence of the judiciary, I do not agree with a court that elects its own members (jobs for the boys) and sets its own remuneration rates with frequent and generous uplifts.

If access to the European Union is dependent, inter alia, on bowing the knee to their courts, then I echo the sentiments of a former President of France, the answer is Non.