Revolutionary implications of the Greek election

comment from the DM campaign team
__________________________________________________

The victory of the Greek far-left in the country's recent general election could have two very important knock-on effects for Britain.

The first is psychological; the second relates to the £10 billion our then chancellor, Alistair Darling, was obliged by Brussels to contribute to the initial Greek bailout fund in 2010. This money is now seriously at risk.

On a positive note, the success of Syriza, together with the votes gained by the centre-right, eurosceptical Independent Greeks and the overtly anti-euro Communist party, is an act of brave collective defiance by a national electorate.

The Greeks have been told repeatedly by successive conservative and social democratic governments in Athens, as well as by the EU elite and mainstream media, that 'there is no alternative' to accepting the terms of the austerity and reform packages imposed by the 'trioka' of Brussels, the IMF and the European Central Bank.

All kinds of terrible consequences have been predicted for the Greek people should they dare to fail to defer to their external, neo-colonial rulers.

In Britain a similar, if more low key at this stage, campaign is being run by the largely taxpayer-funded pro-EU lobby and its allies in the CBI, Goldman Sachs, and other manifestations of big business.

We are told that, should we leave the EU, 'three million jobs' could be lost; that old myth destroyed conclusively 15 years ago by the National Institute for Economic and Social Research, the body that had been paid by the New Labour controlled Britain in Europe campaign to perpetuate it!

All political movements trying to perpetuate the status quo use fear to try to prevent voters even contemplating the possibility that positive change is possible. The pro-EU lobby enjoys psychological hegemony at present because it has succeeded as a consequence of its massive financial advantage in dictating the terms of debate; the focus at present is solely on the supposed 'risks' of change.

Alexis Tsipras and his party were able to win, in part, because they had the guts to challenge and deconstruct the self-serving interpretation of 'common sense' being communicated by the Greek and international political and business elites.

This is what the pro-independence alliance now needs to do in the British context: we have to take on the myth that the EU is a constitutional Godhead that must be deferred to for all time. We have to start changing the way in which the debate about EU membership is framed: we need to point out that there are serious risks to our future economic prosperity, as well as political viability, if we stay in.

The EU is a declining economic and demographic bloc which is in the process of becoming ever more centralised in order to cope with the inherent flaws and contradictions of the Single Currency system. Inevitably if we continue to remain inside, we will become hit with ever more laws and demands for money dictated by the Eurozone bloc of countries voting as one caucus in the Council of Ministers.

The second implication of the Syriza triumph might not be so good for us as a nation: The new Greek premier, Alexis Tsipras, has threatened to renege on his country's debts. This could have serious implications for Britain. 

We were coerced into putting up £10 billion towards the initial bailout package. Our then chancellor, Alistair Darling, at a meeting of the council of ministers in May 2010, initially refused to commit UK taxpayers money on the grounds that as a non-euro country we could not be expected to contribute. The EU then threatened to evoke Article 122 of the treaty, a measure which commits member states to provide assistance to those countries experiencing 'natural disasters'.

Had Mr Darling taken it to a vote, he would have been defeated because of Qualified Majority Voting. And this was all despite the treaty stipulating that there should be no bailouts of governments in the single currency.

This episode shows that the rule of law does not actually apply in Brussels; the Commission as the guardian of the treaty, backed by the legally elastic interpretations of the ECJ, can redefine the rules as they so wish. Yet we are told by the CBI and the pro-EU lobby that Britain will lose 'influence' if we leave the EU. What influence?

For the time being, let's focus on the positive aspects of this Greek drama. The election result may herald the refusal of mass electorates to comply with the elite as never seen post-war. This could be a revolutionary moment in more ways than one. 

__________________________________________________

For more EU and campaign news, follow us on Twitter: @DemocracyMovemt

EU's response to election results risks Europe's stability

The weekend's election results in Greece and France have demonstrated more clearly than ever that the European Union and its austerity policies, designed to preserve its flagship euro currency, are feeding a rise in the popularity of extremist parties.

In Greece, the two centrist parties Pasok and New Democracy together received just 30% of the vote compared with almost 80% three years ago, while a 'radical' left-wing coalition called Syriza secured 17% and the openly fascist Golden Dawn gained 7% giving it seats in the Greek parliament.

France also was not immune to such forces, with Marine Le Pen and her Front National party gaining almost a fifth of votes and coming third in the country's presidential contest - an improvement of more than 2.6 million votes on her father's result in 2007.

Continuing a trend that was already in evidence, voters turned to alternatives to the centrist parties as they refused to budge from the Brussels doctrine and appeared unable to provide people with the responsive government they crave.

As the editorial in today's Guardian puts it, "Democracy matters. When Brussels or Berlin loses sight of that simple fact, voters reach for simpler and uglier solutions."

Stability at risk

For the EU's advocates, who claim the organisation is responsible for preserving peace in Europe since the Second World War, this impetus being given to ultra-nationalist forces by the inability of countries locked within the euro to quickly restore competitiveness and growth to their economies should give pause for thought.

The EU's critics on the other hand have long argued that the only true guarantor of continued peace and stability between European nations is effective democracy, where people feel they have meaningful influence over the rules that affect their lives.

Since the EU's fundamental ethos is political integration, which aims to centralise political decision-making in its largely unaccountable Brussels institutions, it's no surprise that growing numbers of people are coming to realise that the EU system is in reality working against goals of peace and stability by driving Europe away from its post-war democratic revival.

Arrogant elite

Such an idea appears far less shocking when leading EU figures are seen stepping in immediately following a public vote in another country to slap down the result.

Take Peter Altmaier, the chief whip of Angela Merkel's Christian Democrat party, who said that France's president-elect Francois Hollande needed to learn that while his election victory may herald change in France, it would not be allowed to change anything on the EU level.

Almost glorying in how people and their votes no longer matter when it comes to directing their own political future, Herr Altmaier said: "It is very important indeed to send a message to the markets that nothing will fundamentally change."

Germany's chancellor herself has also stressed her opposition to Hollande's key campaign pledge of reopening the euro fiscal pact, telling the Berlin media "that's just not on."

"We in Germany are of the opinion, and so am I personally, that the fiscal pact is not negotiable. It has been negotiated and has been signed by 25 countries," she said.

Turning her fire on Greece, Mrs Merkel insisted that Athens must also comply with the stringent terms of its £100bn bailout even though more than 60% of the Greek electorate had voted for parties rejecting those terms.

The European Commission has also weighed in, telling the new French leader that all previous agreements between France and EU were binding despite the election.

"We expect agreements to be ratified. That is the very basis of the EU," said a Commission spokesman. Yet isn't the ability of a new president or parliament to overturn the decisions of a predecessor in response to a majority of public votes the very basis of democracy? Can there be any further doubt that the EU and democracy are fundamentally incompatible.

Post-democracy?

The moment of truth now looming is not just an economic one over the future of the fiscal pact and the euro, but also a civil and democratic one that goes to the heart of political power on our continent.

Who truly decides how European countries are governed: voters in elections or the technocrats of the EU?

If the EU elite continue on this course of slapping down events in which people cast their votes and expect things to change, they will be playing increasingly dangerous games with the future of Europe.

When those who govern either cannot, or will not, respond to public votes, the necessity of a radical change in course away from EU centralism and its outdated, 1950s goal of political union becomes even more urgent.

Shadow-boxing over constitutional reform

Westminster has today been discussing the subject of 'constitutional renewal', prompted by a statement by Gordon Brown.

Yet when a significant proportion of Britain's laws now derive from remote EU institutions - against which a large majority so recently voted during an EU-specific election - Gordon Brown doesn't seem to think the EU even worth mentioning as part of the problem of how to reconnect politics with the public.

Throughout a statement that threw in every possible distraction - from holding a consultation on changing the voting system to the establishment of some new quango to supervise MPs - the EU didn't get one mention.

On the one hand, Brown claims, he wants the "devolution of power". This, he concludes, will lead to the "engagement of people themselves in their local communities."

But on the other, via the Lisbon Treaty, he's clearly happy to see ever more decision-making centralised in remote EU institutions in Brussels - in the process denying us a promised say - and can't see why that's causing people to disengage from Westminster politics.

"Let us stand together for integrity and democracy", he concluded - after setting out how he plans to ignore the key message of the recent European parliament election.

Instead of a proper acknowledgment of the EU's role in draining away the standing of parliament and sterilising Westminster debate, today we had the government's attempt to change the subject.

Expenses myth

The idea that last week's election wasn't really about the EU at all, but a protest vote about MPs' expenses or other aspects of how parliament works, doesn't stack up.

First, despite their MPs being arguably as badly affected by the revelations as Labour - think duck ponds and moats - the Conservative vote actually went up.

Second, the Lib Dems - a party that was deemed to have come out better from the expenses scandal, but which connived with Labour to deny us the promised referendum on the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty - saw their vote drop.

Where is the quest here to punish all the Westminster parties? But the message on the EU - on the Lisbon Treaty - is crystal clear.

Those opposed to today's EU were up. Those who support the status quo - who actively blocked us being given a say on passing more power to the EU - took a hit.

Not listening

That's why today's statement couldn't be a worse response for Labour's prospects at the next election.

It couldn't be worse because it's increasingly hard to imagine that no-one in government recognises how much of a problem in our democratic system the scale of the EU's powers is now causing - and how much people want to see that change.

Rather, it shows, no-one wants to put that key problem right.

That isn't reducing the 'disconnect' between public and politics. It's making it so much worse.

People have spoken - now it's 'do or die' for Brown

Gordon Brown may have survived trial by Labour MPs, as seems to be the news emerging from this evening's meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party.

But he has not yet saved himself from public opinion.

The media have spent today wallowing in the twin themes of the election of two BNP candidates as MEPs and further debate about Gordon Brown's leadership of the Labour party.

These may well be the most controversial outcomes for commentators, but ultimately they are side-shows.

The danger the media must avoid is that the overall message delivered by voters is overlooked.

The glaring message from yesterday is that people want less EU integration, not more. Overwhelming support was given to a wide range of parties representing all sides of the political spectrum that oppose the Lisbon Treaty.

The spotlight must now shift on to how Gordon Brown intends to deliver what people have clearly said they want.

Not only are Labour MPs, according to those coming out of tonight's meeting, asking how their party can reconnect with the public, and what policy changes are needed to achieve this.

But also millions of people will be watching closely in the coming days to detect whether, after the uproar against our political leaders that has built over recent weeks, Westminster is finally listening.

It's all about Lisbon

As we've said already, the only response that addresses all prevailing political problems is for Gordon Brown to immediately rescind Britain's ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.

The treaty is not only an issue that, more than any other - due to the conspicuously broken manifesto promises of a referendum - speaks to problems of trust between governors and the governed.

As we will show tomorrow, the treaty's emergence in October 2007 actually kick-started the disconnect between Gordon Brown and the public that has today grown to a critical condition.

But it also speaks directly to questions of the degradation of Parliament and consequent falling public faith in our democratic system - a trend that was exacerbated by the recent MPs' expenses scandal.

So tomorrow the story must shift on to what Brown is going to do at the looming EU summit on 18-19 June to deliver on the message of this election - and deliver convincingly enough to stand a chance of saving himself at the next general election.

To go to that summit and do anything other than rescind the Lisbon Treaty is unthinkable in terms of his own fate, the fate of the Labour party and the fate of public faith in our political system.

Having seemingly survived trial by Labour MPs, Brown has 10 days to rescue his future in the court of public opinion.

Brown must act on 'less EU' election verdict

Updated Monday 8 June: 13:06

The European Parliament election has been won overwhelmingly by the 'less EU' parties of varying degrees.

The Conservatives, UKIP, Greens, Libertas, the trade union-backed No2EU and many other smaller parties who took over 63% of the vote all think, at least, that the transfer of decision-making to the EU has gone too far and that radical restructuring of the EU and our relationship with it is needed.

They all oppose the Lisbon Treaty and support a referendum. They all want to see decision-making returned from the EU to the more responsive national, or more local, level.

Votes for these parties outnumbered considerably those cast for the duplicitous New Labour and Lib Dems, who have shown themselves happy to surrender ever more decision-making to EU institutions and to deny us a say over that process - breaking clear election promises in the process.

These are the parties who have shown in their behaviour over the Lisbon Treaty that they don't want to govern. And people have taken this first chance since those events to fulfil their wish.

All-important response

The implications of how the votes have been shared out between the parties - if any of substance - can be debated later. What matters is how Gordon Brown and the government will respond.

It matters to us, but most of all it matters for Brown himself.

Because at this highly sensitive time for faith our political system, people are desperate for evidence that our leaders are listening. And in just 10 days time Gordon Brown will have a clear opportunity on a grand stage to show that he has heard us speak.

Following today's result, Brown has a choice of whether to go to the next meeting of the European Council on 18-19 June and conspicuously represent the people's verdict. Less integration, not more.

Or, despite the clear message of this election, indulge with his fellow members of Europe's political elite in another EU bout of 'carry on regardless'.

Carry on conspiring to bully the Irish people into voting twice on exactly the same rejected treaty - the document that, according to the respected House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee, is "substantially equivalent" to the EU Constitution that was also rejected by the French and Dutch peoples.

Carry on overlooking EU waste, fraud and pre-recession levels of lavish living while the rest of us tighten our belts.

Carry on believing that Britain's ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, marred by broken manifesto promises, holds any real democratic legitimacy.

Gordon faces two paths, with two very different destinations.

At the end of one stands a chance of rebuilding public faith in our political system and, alongside, bringing himself personally back from the political brink.

At the end of the other lies a further degradation in his already low levels of support, bringing on the leadership challenge that would surely end his stint as Prime Minister.

Rescind Lisbon - get powers back

For Brown to see today's result and, mere days later, be complicit in moves pushing political integration still further - such as trying to manoeuvre Ireland into voting twice on the Lisbon Treaty - would be an extraordinary two-fingered salute to voters just at a time when faith in our political system is at an all time low.

If Brown chooses to show he is listening - and there can be no doubt that his own personal future as Prime Minister now depends absolutely on him doing so - he must rescind our ratification of the Lisbon Treaty while he still can, and start the process of getting powers back. He must go to that 18 June summit and be bold in demanding radical change.

In doing so he would start the process of making our Parliament matter again.

Our political system simply will not stand another incidence of a clear public verdict being ignored. It's clear that people are sick of politicians who think they know best. Brown has a chance to act, to act decisively, and on the side of the majority expressed opinion in these elections.

The summit will be Gordon Brown's last chance. Whether he chooses a response that brings him back from the brink, or one that seals his political fate, is in his hands alone over the next few days.

New campaign: Not Liberal - Not Democrats!

The Liberal Democrat bid to increase its tally of MEPs at the forthcoming European Parliament election took an early knock yesterday, with the launch of a hard-hitting new attack campaign by the Democracy Movement.

The DM has announced plans to blast the party as "Not Liberal - Not Democrats" in some of its most vulnerable seats, over the actions of leading party figures on the EU's Lisbon Treaty.

In particular, the campaign has been launched in defence of Ireland's democratic 'No' to the Lisbon Treaty. Leading Lib Dem MEP Graham Watson has pledged to use taxpayers' money he and his colleagues will receive from the European Parliament to help the Irish and EU political elite bully the Irish people into reversing a clear 'No' vote to the Lisbon Treaty given in last year's referendum.

Speaking on behalf of all ALDE group MEPs in the European Parliament, Watson recently told the Irish Times that it "would be our great pleasure" to help the Irish government fund a major campaign in favour of the Lisbon Treaty in the repeat referendum that the country is being pressured to stage this autumn.

Ireland's vote was the only referendum any people in Europe have had on the Lisbon Treaty, its "substantially equivalent" predecessor - the EU Constitution - having also been rejected overwhelmingly by the French and Dutch peoples in 2005.

Watson's pledge makes a vote for the Lib Dems on 4th June a vote to disregard the previous referendum result and to bully the Irish people into reversing it.

Succession of affronts

But the campaign on the Lib Dems follows what the DM is calling "a succession of affronts to democracy and civil liberties" by the party, caused by their enthusiasm for handing ever more decision-making to the EU.

They amount to a stark conflict between the party's claimed values and actions that can no longer be allowed to pass largely unnoticed by voters.

Not only did the Lib Dems vote to approve the highly illiberal and anti-democratic Lisbon Treaty, but at every stage of the treaty's progress through Parliament the Lib Dems did what it took - abstaining in the Commons and voting against in the Lords - to prevent us being given the EU referendum they promised us at the last general election.

That's why the campaign has been called Not Liberal - Not Democrats.

'Double whammy' roadshow

A giant mobile poster bearing the Lib Dem logo and the campaign slogan (pictured above) is set to be deployed throughout May and early June. The roadshow will be accompanied by targetted local leafleting, letter-writing campaigns by DM activists and other activities.

The 'double whammy' campaign will rove Graham Watson's South West euro constituency, amongst other places, also visiting the most marginal Westminster seats of Lib Dem MPs who broke their promises and refused to support a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty / EU Constitution.

These will include Chris Huhne - Shadow Home Secretary (Eastleigh, Maj: 568), Jeremy Browne - Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Taunton, Maj: 573), Paul Burstow - Chief Whip (Sutton & Cheam, Maj: 2846) and Julia Goldsworthy - Shadow Communities and Local Government (Falmouth & Camborne, Maj: 1886).

Twenty of the Lib Dem MPs who refused to support a referendum - almost a third of the parliamentary party - are in vulnerable Westminster seats with majorities of under 5,000.

Clegg ambushed

The campaign kicked off yesterday with a leafleting picket of the official Lib Dem Euro-Election campaign launch, forcing Nick Clegg to cancel a planned outdoor TV interview and to dodge our giant poster as he came and went from the venue.

Having ratted on the referendum they promised in their last manifesto, the Lib Dems now say that they support a wider 'In / Out' referendum on Britain's relationship with the EU.

But given the party's recent failure to deliver on an EU referendum promise written in their general election manifesto, it's not clear how they think their alleged support for a different referendum can be believed.

Even if they do now support a wider referendum on Britain's relationship with the EU, and would actually vote in support of one should an opportunity in Parliament arise, there's no reason why that should have precluded people being consulted in the meantime on whether more powers should be passed to the EU or not.

If fact, the logical action if you believe Britain's relationship with the EU is now at a such a stage that it should be reviewed via referendum is to block any further power transfers until that consultation is conducted.

That's what makes this 'new' referendum idea looks like typical politicians' spin, attempting to confuse people and disguise the fact that the Lib Dems do not support people being consulted about the EU's powers at all.

Please use our 'Order leaflets' link (above right) to request some copies of our campaign flyer. A pdf of the leaflet can be seen here. You can keep up with the latest info about the campaign by joining the Not Liberal - Not Democrats group on Facebook, or by signing up for the eBulletin on the DM's main website.

South West MEP presses Gordon Brown to scrap the pound

The South West's only Liberal Democrat MEP, Graham Watson, seems to be on a quest for maximum unpopularity.

And on current form he might just end up taking the whole Lib Dem campaign for the European Parliament elections down with him.

During the Prime Minister's visit to the European Parliament in Strasbourg this week - on the first leg of his pre-G20 'world tour' - Watson used his regulation three minutes speaking time to press Gordon Brown to take Britain into the euro.

Responding to Gordon Brown's address to MEPs, Watson said that he expected the single currency to "emerge stronger from this crisis" and asked the Prime Minister "Will you now work to bring the United Kingdom into the euro in the post-recession period?"

Euro problem

Ever allowing his starry-eyed enthusiasm for EU centralisation to cloud sound economic judgement, Watson's call came despite almost daily evidence that the inflexibility of the euro has exacerbated a boom-bust cycle in some countries and is now making the recession worse for its members.

Neither has the euro prevented banking crises and the need for bailouts among member countries.

Ireland's construction-led economy has collapsed so spectacularly that a leading Irish economist has warned that the country may have to quit the euro. Unemployment in Spain has grown to over 3 million and, in the eurozone as a whole, is at its highest for more than two years.

Markets fear debt defaults in Italy and Greece, where debt has risen to huge proportions of GDP. And European Central Bank president, Jean-Claude Trichet, has admitted that the currency bloc is under "extreme strain".

Both Greece and France have already seen major public protests against insufficient action by their governments to relieve the effects of the recession - governments that simply can't afford to replace with cash bailouts and 'stimulus packages' what a drop in the value of their currency would deliver.

Even arch EU fanatic and former European Commission president Jacques Delors admits to pessimism about the euro's future.

This is what Graham Watson MEP bizarrely wants to embroil us in.

It's little wonder that the EU has recently been pushing for the IMF's resources to be increased dramatically, likely hoping that the emergency funding body will help to bail out those countries suffering the worst inside the euro straightjacket.

How much Britain and other EU countries who have wisely kept control of their economies will be asked to splash out via the IMF towards papering over the euro's widening economic cracks remains to be seen.

Sterling boost

Of course, Britain has similar economic problems to those being suffered by other European countries mentioned above.

But thanks to our flexible exchange rate as a result of keeping the pound, Britain's goods and services have at least been made considerably more competitive in world markets right when we needed it most.

The benefit of British exports becoming cheaper due to the recent fall in the value of the pound means that businesses selling to the eurozone have been given a timely boost that would not have been possible had we joined the euro when people like Mr Watson were first campaigning for that change years ago.

Had we followed his advice back then, British companies would today be locked into a fixed exchange rate with the eurozone and facing greater pressure to make cuts to wage costs and jobs instead - just like those inside the euro.

Real lessons

In the face of this recent overwhelming reminder of how unpredictable economic conditions can be, Mr Watson's perverse view seems to be that we should lock ourselves into the 'one-size-fits-none' euro and give up control of key economic levers like our interest and exchange rates.

Not for him has the crisis illuminated, in reality, how critical it is to retain maximum economic flexibility to respond to rapidly changing conditions.

That, of course, can only be achieved by keeping the pound.

No surprise, then, that public opinion remains strongly against Britain joining the euro.

A BBC poll at the start of the year showed that, despite the economic troubles, 71% of people would vote against Britain joining if it were put to a referendum.

Not liberal - Not democrat

Watson's controversial euro demand follows a pledge earlier this month to help Ireland's ruling political party fund a second 'Yes' campaign in any new vote on the Lisbon Treaty.

A second referendum is predicted for this autumn, following the Treaty's rejection by Irish voters last year.

Given Watson tops the list of his party's candidates in the South West, anyone in Bristol, Gloucestershire, Somerset, Dorset, Wiltshire, Devon, Cornwall or Gibraltar voting for the Liberal Democrats is essentially voting to re-elect him.

So far, such a vote stands not just for bullying the Irish people into reversing their clear 'No' vote to the Lisbon Treaty, but also for scrapping the pound.

And there's very little either liberal or democratic about that.

New No2EU 'party' launches for Euro Elections

This morning another new and interesting entrant to the 4 June European Parliament elections has been launched in a House of Commons meeting room.

Called No2EU - Yes to Democracy, the "EU-critical electoral alliance" describes itself as a "new trade union-backed electoral platform of progressive campaigning groups".

Chairing the new platform of candidates is Rail, Maritime and Transport (RMT) union chief Bob Crow, providing in the form of the RMT's over 80,000 members a level of backing that could give the platform a massive head start in local-level campaigning.

Joining the RMT in the alliance are leading figures in the CWU, T&G and Unison unions, Trade Unionists Against the EU Constitution and the Liberal Party.

The political stance of the group is a combination of opposition to the Lisbon Treaty and the EU-led privatisation of public services, support for workers' rights and protest at the corrupt EU gravy train.

On this last point - most interestingly of the Euro Elections launches so far - the group is pledging not to take their seats as MEPs, should they win any.

Other areas of interest include EU militarisation and the EU's assault on civil liberties.

In the context of high levels of opposition to the Lisbon Treaty and disgust over the treatment of Ireland after their 'No' vote, the recent Lindsey oil refinery strikes about the exclusion of British workers in favour of foreign labour, recent renewed attempts to privatise the Royal Mail to meet the requirements of the EU's postal services Directives, and high levels of public irritation about politicians milking excessive expenses, the No2EU platform has huge potential.

By further openly admitting that little of consequence towards their objectives can be changed from the "expensive fraud" European Parliament and refusing to cash in anyway by taking up any million-pound MEP seats they win, the No2EU alliance also has a powerful opportunity to be seen as the most trustworthy and reliable of those on the ballot paper bidding for the anti-EU vote.

The result may be that the group could slide neatly into a productive, left-leaning niche comprised of traditional Labour supporters, former Lib Dem voters dismayed by Nick Clegg's failure to support a promised referendum on the Lisbon Treaty plus the recent Lib Dem pledge to help bully the Irish people into reversing their clear 'No' to Lisbon, together with any naturally left-leaning or even simply disillusioned UKIP voters.

Altogether, No2EU - Yes to Democracy looks to be the 'party' to watch in the run up to the 4 June vote.

Libertas launch Euro-Election campaign

Libertas have today announced that they will be standing candidates in Britain for the European Parliament elections on 4 June.

Founded by businessman Declan Ganley, Libertas played a key role in the successful 'No' campaign to the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland's referendum last year.

Now a pan-EU political party, planning to stand candidates in all 27 EU member countries in the forthcoming Euro Elections, Libertas today announced their UK leader - Robin Matthews, a former soldier. But they have not yet published a manifesto.

Electoral challenges

Ganley has claimed repeatedly that he is not a 'eurosceptic'. His frequent recitations of long discredited pro-EU mantras about the EU's benefits have portrayed Libertas as aiming for position to the pro-EU side of the Tories.

While Ganley has also repeatedly made some very good points about the EU's impact on democracy, electorally it's hard to see where such a position leaves Libertas in this country.

With a resolutely pro-EU outlook, Libertas certainly aren't likely to attract many UKIP votes. Those who still remain loyal to the Tories during Euro Elections are likely to stay that way, especially given their party's similar anti-Lisbon / pro-referendum stance.

Libertas might well scrape some votes from the Lib Dems and Labour but that's unlikely to get them very far.

Nevertheless, as we saw from the Kilroy bandwagon during the 2004 Euro Elections, anything can happen if you can attract a couple of celebrities. Especially if, like Ganley, you also have plenty of cash.

There are undoubtedly opportunities for Libertas in other countries such as Germany or Belgium where a mainstream EU-critical / pro-referendum party has never been an option for voters.

Mixed messages

Such positioning problems here in Britain may be the reason why postings today on the Libertas website paint a rather different picture of the party's stance compared to Declan Ganley's previous statements.

They say little that British eurosceptics would disagree with.

In particular, under the headline "Why vote Libertas UK", it says: "We want to return powers to Britain and take back control of our own destiny."

But it is the impression that messages are being tailored - in conflicting directions - for different national audiences that remains a worry. It's unclear where that leaves the claim that "Libertas voters in Germany, France, Bulgaria and all the other states will be voting for the same thing as you."

Perhaps the manifesto, when it comes, will illuminate how the apparently conflicting ideas of being a pro-EU party that supports taking back powers to nation states come together.

The big question for prospective voters is: which does Libertas mean? If elected to the European Parliament, which outlook would prevail overall?

Lib Dem pledge to bully Ireland over Lisbon

A vote for the Liberal Democrats at the European Parliament elections on 4 June is a vote to bully the Irish people into reversing their clear 'No' vote to the Lisbon Treaty.

That's the message being sent today by Graham Watson MEP, according to this article in the Irish Times.

As the leader of the Liberal group in the European Parliament, Watson has pledged "to help fund a major campaign in favour of the Lisbon Treaty" when the Irish government calls a second referendum, which is expected in the autumn.

Expressing his group's support for the Irish government and EU elite plan to ignore the previous referendum result and make the Irish people vote a second time on the same treaty, Mr Watson said "It would be our great pleasure to support Fianna Fáil if they wanted us to, either in the referendum campaign in the autumn or any other campaign".

Watson tops the Liberal Democrat list of candidates for the South-West of England euro-constituency, which covers Bristol, Gloucestershire, Somerset, Dorset, Wiltshire, Devon and Cornwall, and which also includes Gibraltar.

Credibility chasm

In the article, Mr Watson also rehearses the inevitable scare-mongering that a second 'No' vote to the Lisbon Treaty would force Ireland to leave the EU - a line so weak that its lack of credibility is far more likely to be a hindrance to securing a 'Yes' vote in any referendum than a help.

"It is very difficult to see any country being able to stay in if they have had two Nos from the people," he burbles. Not so difficult for anyone who has read the EU treaty, however.

The reality is that if the Lisbon Treaty is not ratified by every single EU member country, it doesn't become law, and the EU continues to exist - and every country continues to be a member of the EU - on the basis of the current, post-Nice, treaty.

That contains no clause under which a member country can be thrown out of the EU.

Any decision as to the extent of Ireland's participation in the European Union after a second 'No' vote will be entirely down to the Irish government.

Unless Watson is revealing that it is the position of Irish Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, that he will take Ireland out of the EU altogether if there is a second 'No' vote, then Watson is either blowing smoke or exposing his ignorance.

Time for change

In truth, a second 'No' to the Lisbon Treaty from Ireland would be a welcome earthquake for the entire EU structure as we know it today. And Ireland would be far from alone in administering that much-needed shake of the foundations.

Not only has the Polish president said that he will not sign the Lisbon Treaty into law until Ireland has settled its position, but the president of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus, has expressed a similar stance.

The treaty also looks set to remain an outstanding issue in Germany for some months yet, while its impact on the German constitution is studied by that country's constitutional court.

What's more, by May 2010 a Conservative government may be in power in Britain with the policy of rescinding Britain's ratification of the treaty if it has not yet been approved by every other EU member country.

But before the events of the autumn and spring 2010 unfold, Graham Watson perhaps ought to be more concerned about how popular his support for bullying the Irish people into reversing their already clearly expressed view on the Lisbon Treaty is going to be with South West voters, come the elections on 4 June.

Parties punished for broken referendum promise?

On the face of it, it's perhaps hard to imagine that the issue of the broken promise over an EU Constitution referendum can have made much of a contribution to Labour's terrible results in last Thursday's local elections.

Not with such powerful factors as mortgage problems, rising food and fuel prices, and the badly handled change over the 10p tax rate in play.

Those issues alone could easily explain Labour getting a hammering.

But that the betrayal of the referendum promise may have been a bigger influence on the results than many have imagined is perhaps shown in the fact that it wasn't just Labour doing badly.

Despite Labour's woes, and despite Nick Clegg's recent election as their new leader, the similarly anti-referendum Lib Dems' also had a terrible night.

Taking economic factors alone into the equation, that really shouldn't have happened.

The Lib Dems managed to pick up only 33 more councillors (compared to 257 for the Conservatives) and saw their share of the vote decline again.

According to BBC political editor Nick Robinson, it dropped 1% lower than last year and was 4% lower than 2004. That Labour did so badly that the Lib Dems edged up into 2nd place overall is really neither here nor there.

Lib Dem London disaster

Looking at the results in South London in particular, this situation must be a particular concern to several MPs at the very top of the party.

In the London assembly 'South West' constituency the Lib Dems were beaten into a not-even-close second place after the Tories.

Given this assembly constituency is chiefly made up of not a single Conservative parliamentary seat but three Lib Dem ones - in particular those of Lib Dem deputy leader and shadow chancellor Vince Cable, and shadow foreign secretary Ed Davey - these results must have created considerable concern among the party's leadership about their prospects at the next general election.

Neither was this an isolated result. Nextdoor in the 'Croydon & Sutton' London assembly constituency, comprising two Tory, one Labour and two Lib Dem parliamentary seats, the Lib Dems were beaten into third place.

DM campaigned heavily in South London

No coincidence, perhaps, that these constituencies were the subject of intense campaigning by the DM criticising Liberal Democrat MPs, and those of other parties, for intending to abandon their manifesto promises to support a referendum on the EU Constitution treaty.

More than 20,000 of our 'Don't let your MP take you for a fool' leaflets were distributed in Ed Davey's constituency alone, and the same number in Sutton & Cheam.

Ten thousand leaflets were distributed in several others, including Richmond Park and Carshalton & Wallington, complemented by local media advertising.

Parties should reflect on referendum gaffe

If the Lib Dems were hit by their behaviour over an EU treaty referendum, as seems a plausible explanation for their poor performance, then it would surely be a mistake to imagine that the issue had no effect on the Labour result.

Polls consistently showed than an overwhelming majority of people wanted the say they were promised on the treaty, and the arguments used to slide out of promises given were so threadbare it should have been embarrassing.

Beyond the details of the treaty, their actions made both Labour and the Lib Dems look shifty and untrustworthy. And that's never going to make for good election results.

While together they may have succeeded in pushing the treaty through the Commons, both Labour and the Lib Dems should reflect on whether these results show they in fact haven't yet got away with breaking that referendum promise.

And on whether, with the treaty still being ratified by Parliament, there's still time to honour their manifesto promises and prevent an even bigger disaster come the general election.

If not, we plan to be very busy in the most likely two years before that election, ensuring local voters know which MPs they can and cannot trust.