gc

Tom Wise MEP in the European Parliament Ind - Dem Group UK Independence Party UKIP Eastern Region Region


As you will be well aware there has been an ongoing argument about whether the European Parliament should continue to shuttle between Brussels and Strasbourg, an activity that costs taxpayers the cool sum of €200 million per year, or alternatively settle in one location. With over 1 million people across the EU Member States having signed a petition calling for the European Parliament to have only “one seat” it might seem strange that nothing has been achieved in this vocally supported campaign. Of course it should be noted that there is a third “seat”; one mustn’t forget the parliament building in Luxembourg which despite its size and layout is almost exclusively used as offices for administration work.

However, this debate has recently heated up as a result of the Strasbourg roof falling in! Not one but two Strasbourg plenary sessions have had to be re-located to Brussels as a result of the Strasbourg building not being fit for purpose. Justifiably people saw this temporary rearrangement as something that could be organised on a permanent basis. Unsurprisingly the answer from the bureaucrats has been the same old response: this arrangement is in the Treaty and therefore cannot be changed until such time as the Treaty is changed. However, since this is one area where the national veto is still alive and well, the likelihood of that happening is as close to zero as mathematics can get! Why would a French government sign away what is effectively a big fat monthly cheque to its pretty university town of Strasbourg?

It was of course that committed European, and our one time Prime Minister, Tony Blair who signed the Treaty addition that ensures the travelling circus continues ad infinitum. But I believe all those UK citizens campaigning for “one seat” i.e. a permanent base for the European Parliament (in Brussels) are missing the bigger picture. The best way to save taxpayers’ money is for there to be no “seat”. Quite simply the European Parliament, wherever it is based, is a dreadful and unjustifiable waste of money. At best it is a talking shop, or Duma, where political opponents simply state previously held views. Any decision made there can and often is overturned by the Commission.

Since the French are not going to allow the EP to downsize to “one seat” it is guaranteed that they will not acquiesce to the “nil seat” suggestion…and so we are brought to that same old conclusion; the EU cannot be changed, our membership costs us billions of pounds every year with very little to show in return; and every effort to improve our lot from within the system fails.

Thus let us not argue about “one seat”, “two seats” or three: withdrawal from the EU solves the problem at a stroke. Obviously this suggestion is unlikely to be well received by those whose careers have been built and depend on project Europe: however, I know that is a popular proposal with the UK general public, who, when asked in 2004, said loudly and clearly NO to European Union!

Tom Wise MEP
Brussels
26th September 2008

Henry IX

What exactly is TW's status with UKIP now? I know he jumped out of the IND/DEM group (the day before he got stictched up by the NOTW) and thought he'd also been given the boot by the party? However, i see he's still using the party website and his contact address includes UKIP...