‘If localism is good, why grow a larger EU?’

This opinion piece by former mayoral hopeful Philip Pover is a response to Victoria Anderson’s article, ‘Bristolians, do the right thing on June 23’…

This article seems rather condescending – telling voters which way is the ‘right’ way, implying they shouldn’t think for themselves at all.

One could equally say “Do the right thing – the right thing is to vote LEAVE on 23rd June”. Just because Victoria says staying is the right thing, doesn’t make it so. The whole tone of this article is very condescending (e.g. “perceived pressure on public services” as if we might all be imagining it!) and as if it would be immoral if your conscience tells you enough is enough and to vote OUT.

Uncontrolled immigration certainly is one of the most important topics – not because of any racism or xenophobia, but simply because of numbers. We have a small island with limited space, particularly in the south (unless you want every blade of grass to be built upon) and we are already much more densely populated than France, Germany etc. Huge countries (e.g. USA, Canada, Australia) had the sense to limit immigration *before* they got over-stretched. UK has already left it too long. Our population density is already straining housing, education, NHS, employment and benefits. It seems the only way to control our borders is outside the EU. That’s not racism, it’s purely mathematics -you can’t keep pouring a quart (or even a litre) into a pint pot!

Victoria, along with most Remainers, spreads gloom about the prospect of being outside the EU as if the prospect of remaining inside is so rosy. The EU is extremely costly and inefficient, and adds ever more bureaucracy – we have enough of our own!  There is the expression “better the devil you know” but that doesn’t apply in all cases. There are many examples around the world, where the devil we know is so bad that an uncertain escape is better than certain subjugation.

Confidence in the UK is certainly damaged by all the made-up doom-saying of the Remainers. Whatever decision is reached, Britain has been damaged unnecessarily by all the Remain scaremongering, most of which is spurious e.g. safety and “political destabilisation of the biggest peace project” (actually our continued safety is due to NATO, not the EU); job losses (plenty of British jobs are being lost within the EU – e.g. steel and BHS – with much lower immigration the jobs ratio will be better); “economic collapse” (if there is a large temporary downturn, it is the fear campaign that has planted it and is watering it); the fight against international crime is helped by Interpol/Europol and European arrest warrants etc but that’s not the EU. Not everything European is controlled by the EU.

As some people point out, the EU is far distant from the original EEC and going in a direction many people don’t want (and not only Brits, apparently). Many eurocrats seem to want a United States of Europe with a single military force, taxation and enormous bureaucracy but that isn’t what has kept us safe since the last tyrant ruled Europe – what’s kept us safe has been the co-operation of independent nations
in NATO. Anticrime cooperation is just as sensible whether the UK is inside or outside the EU -it benefits all parties (well, except the criminal
fraternity of course!).

Nobody knows the future for certain; the closest we can get to predicting it is to base our guesses on the recent past. We can see how the EU has been working (or not); we can see our population growing by an extra million every three years (completely unsustainable!); we can see more and more decisions being made outside our nation. If you want more of the same then that’s a vote for the EU. If you want the ability to undo some of the damage then that’s a vote to leave. Who is Victoria to say what is right or wrong?

Remainers often suggest that leaving the EU would mean throwing away anything that might be good – if you want to keep the baby, you have to keep the dirty bathwater too. Why? Common sense suggests that if we leave the EU, we should review all the red tape and legislation – keep what is good and ditch what is bad and the sooner the better. Good environmental standards etc are not owned by the EU -the EU can’t stop us doing a good thing just because we are not in their club any more. As a member of the Bristol Green Party, I would have thought Victoria would want UK to act responsibly towards the environment, whether we are inside or outside the EU.

Remainers talk about losing all the subsidies and grants the EU provides with the money we give it. If we didn’t have to pay so much to the EU we could continue to do *all* of those current things and still have money left over – whether that be five, ten or fifteen million per day may be arguable but there’s certainly an awful lot more money going out to the EU than there is coming back from the EU.

And let us not forget that UK plc is approx. £1.7trillion in debt! (Have a look at www.NationalDebtClock.co.uk if you dare! unfortunately, that’s
£47,000 per taxpayer, not £47 each!) If we did nothing else with the saved cash but pay down the national debt, that would be a good and efficient thing to do -we waste so much on paying just interest, liked being maxxed out on all your credit cards at once.

While we’re thinking of babies and bathwater, let’s remember that life outside the EU doesn’t stagnate – if UK left and saw something good happening anywhere in the world (inside or outside the EU) we could adopt the same good practice. Wanting to make your own decisions doesn’t mean cutting off your nose to spite your face. An independent UK wouldn’t have to do the opposite to Europe, unless it was better to do that.

Talking of good practice, why has the EU not banned the pernicious and greedy “zero hours contracts”? Not much protection for workers there!

Interesting that Remainers talk down the UK so much – wouldn’t that have been treason in the old days? “The Dirty Man of Europe”? All countries certainly have a long way to go to clear up the mess human society makes of the environment but, um, which is the only country in Europe where you feel safe to drink tapwater? Oh yes, GB!  We don’t have the EU to thank for “cleaner air, cleaner seas, green spaces and wildlife protections”.

Our air and seas are not clean enough; we are losing our green space (not least to housing developments); and our wildlife need much better protection and somewhere to live that isn’t densely built upon. But none of that is going to happen just by paying Brussels (either in EU membership fees or in fines). We need to address those problems ourselves and the most efficient way to do that is by having direct control over your own land. Of course, you need the right politicians as well -but that’s another story!

Utopian visions can be dangerous but it seems to be the eurocrats that are more wishing on a star than the Brexiteers.  And Britain is not the only population that is worried by the expansionist evolution of the EU. Cooperation (great) does not necessitate uniformity (not so good).

Bristol’s new mayor Marvin Rees says “Devolution is frankly the only game in town” so, if localism is good, why should growing an ever larger EU be such a good idea?  We’ve seen many ill effects of over-powerful multinational companies and general globalism trampling over local interests; increasing pollution by transporting goods all over the world when much of it is available locally. If you believe in localism, perhaps the EU is not for you?

Philip Pover was an independent mayoral candidate in the 2012 elections. He came to Bristol for University then stayed, working for ‘a couple of small companies and some big ones (e.g. Hewlett Packard)’.   

Read more opinion pieces here