A legal challenge to the EU's political funding plans
January 14 2004
Those light-fingered lads from Brussels are getting ready to dip their sticky fingers into your wallet again. Under Regulation (EC) No. 2004/2003 of November 4th 2003, they're going to have £3 million, provided by the tax-payer, for "European political parties".
There are two obvious problems here for you, the long-suffering tax-payer. Firstly, do you want to have to pay to support political parties at all? I suspect not. But even if you do, are you keen to promote political parties "at the European level"? Isn't it enough to cope with Labour, Conservative and Lib-Dem, without having to worry about the European People's Party, the European Socialists or the United Nordic Left?
Be in no doubt. This whole scam is designed to force people to think in European terms, and to promote European integration (a bit like the plan to replace "Made in Britain" with "Made in the EU"). They're quite open about it. They say "political parties at the European level are important as a factor for integration and for forming a European awareness".
There is a clear element of censorship built into the conditions. To qualify, parties must "observe the principles on which the EU is founded". So no money if a party has any doubts, say, on some aspect of the free movement of people or capital in the EU. Parties must "recognise the Charter of Fundamental Rights". The Conservatives have serious reservations about this Charter -- so they could be excluded. Any party supporting capital punishment (as the majority of British voters do) would be excluded.
They do have the decency to point out that parties opposed to EU integration will also be entitled to funding. But think about it for a moment. If you're keen on European integration, if you believe in the People's Republic of Europe, then of course you'll be keen to develop pan-European political parties.
But many people believe, as I do, that the nation is the only viable forum for democracy. They believe that the diverse nations of Europe just don't have enough in common, in terms of history, culture, language, and economic interests to create a genuine common public opinion, without which democracy can't work properly. So they don't want pan-European political parties in the first place. By all means let's have cordial relations with like-minded political parties in Europe (and elsewhere), but let's not create centralised trans-national parties.
So the discrimination is built-in to this proposal. It is designed to give your money to parties that promote EU integration, and to deny it to other parties. Whatever your view on the European issue, you must surely agree that this discrimination is fundamentally wrong and profoundly anti-democratic.
What can we do to protest? I and a group of twenty-five other MEPs, from many countries and from both sides of the political spectrum, have taken legal advice, and we are told that there is a good legal case that this Regulation conflicts with the fundamental laws of the EU. We have decided to take a case to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Strasbourg, to seek to have the Regulation overturned.
This will take time, and will be expensive (all 26 MEPs involved -- and there may well be more as time goes on -- are chipping in a contribution). And like most law-suits, the outcome is uncertain. We believe we have a strong case, but the ECJ has a reputation for promoting European integration and tending to rule in favour of it.
But win or lose, we think the exercise is hugely worthwhile. If we lose, at least we shall have drawn public attention to the profoundly cynical and anti-democratic nature of the European project. And if we win, it will be a famous victory. We shall have struck a blow for common sense, for the tax-payer, and for democracy itself. Watch this space.
For more background, see www.euobserver.com
|
|