Home Page

In this blog we argue that the EU is ill-designed for its declared purpose, because it is well-designed for a different, and deliberately obscured, purpose. The true design, which is being steadily and deceitfully achieved, is to draw governance in Europe away from the nation states and their citizens and into a supranational entity called the European Union, with its Commission as the seat of power.
We began our blog in the months leading up to the UK’s Referendum on continuing its membership of the EU. We have continued it as a detailed review of EU, a summary of Brexit news and comment on both.
For a full list of articles click All Posts or visit the monthly archive.
On this Home page we review some recent posts and also some we regard as useful background to the debate. We invite (moderated) reader comments – please keep the debate polite.

Remainers and Leavers see the world, the EU, the UK and each other quite differently. In the 15 months (to September 2017) since the referendum, the binary question – to leave or to remain? – has both congealed and fragmented. Most people in the UK now accept that Britain will leave the EU. However, the means of leaving, and the possible consequences, continue to generate as much hot air as the original question.

At one extreme the cry is, “To hell with them, let’s just get out”. At the other the whimper is, “Oh! But it will hurt so much, let’s hang on to what we can for as long as we can.” At least those roughly represent the views that come down to us from politicians and commentators.

More and more citizens are noticing that the EU’s objectives do not serve their interests. They want change but see it won’t happen under the present structures, which are designed to minimise their involvement.

For most of us it seems that we can’t trust the politicians to tell us the truth, we can’t trust the media to understand what is happening and report it clearly and fairly, and we can’t trust the negotiators to represent anything other than the interests of their own groups. The difficulties of Brexit are many and complex.

We understand that while there is comfort in the suggestion to “always keep a-hold of Nurse, for fear of finding something worse”, the decision to leave has been made and now needs to be implemented fairly, competently and in the interests of the country’s citizens, and future citizens.

Latest Updates (revised 24 September 2017)

The negotiations for Brexit are grinding slow but not fine. The EU has adopted a fixed position, a mandate, and is not giving an inch, or even a millimetre. The UK side is responding with bluff over-optimism from David Davis and some cool and interesting papers from the Civil Service.

In March Jean-Claude Juncker, Commission President put forward some options for the future integration of the 27 remaining member states, and possible future members, which we reviewed in Our Commentary on the White Paper and More on the White Paper. We also review his State of the Union 2017 address.

In July we looked at some of the issues surrounding the Brussels negotiations in The Withdrawal Method. We then looked at some of the arguments that have been used to persuade us that the UK should remain in, or closely allied to, the Single Market and reviewed these in For Richer or Poorer? and more recently in The £350 Million Question.

In a series of five posts, beginning with Overtime Lords, we challenged some of the themes we read in EU documents, quoting extensively in support of our arguments.


14 thoughts on “Home Page

    1. Thank you for your comment. I’m not sure what sort of answer you expect to your question though. I have never belonged to a political party. I have taken to social media to protest against the EU for two reasons mainly (and many lesser ones): it is aiming for a supra-national government that cannot be dismissed by its citizens, however it performs, and it continues to obstruct a more community-oriented collaboration among European nations, which might make a better shot at bring economic and other benefits to more people.


  1. It is not every day one encounters a new Eurosceptic blog site so was wondering what your political history was?

    You can read up my profile on The Harrogate Agenda website.

    Are you yet familiar with The Harrogate Agenda and if you are what are your thoughts on it?

    Finally have you read Flexcit and do you in principle support it?


    1. I’ve heard of the Harrogate Agenda but not studied it in detail. I like the idea but am concerned at the practicalities of bring it about.
      I’ve dipped into Flexcit and support what I have read.


      1. Niall, This blog has two authors so I thought I might add my response to my brother’s. As a youngster I was very left wing but, like many others, became aware that we must address the world as it is and not as we wish it were. “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong,” according to H L Mencken (roughly). Grand designs seldom, if ever, work and are certain to fail if they don’t adapt to evidence and changes in the real world. The EU is further proof of this.
        I agree with you that decisions should be devolved as close to those affected by them as is practical and that competing administrations should lead to innovative solutions providing fair, efficient and effective government. We must be careful that higher-level decisions don’t get hog-tied and then adopt QMV across incompatible interests, as the EU does.
        Further comment on your proposals are more appropriate on your own site. I can’t seem to do this from my smart phone, which is all I have with me this week.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. We aim to draw people’s attentions to the fundamental flaws in the EU’s design, how it excludes influence from its citizens and, because of the entrenched ideology, will not be reformed. It performs badly and is sustained only by myths and propaganda. Worst of all it prevents the formation of a useful European community.


      3. Well as you well know we won the referendum and so the BIG issue now is what happens next and to ensure the Brexit offered is doable in the time available,workable and causes us as little grief as possible. This is of course the aim of the blog EU Referendum where I first came across you and your blog.
        As to the long term future for the continent of Europe (because it is so important to differentiate between the EU and Single Market of 28, the EEA of 32 and Europe of 51 countries) this is covered in Flexcit and ultimately sees an European Economic Space controlled by UNECE in Geneva.
        The more blogs working together to support the above the better.


      4. Thanks for your comment. I agree that we need as much support as possible during the Brexit negotiations to ensure that there will be no back-sliding towards Remain as things get difficult. They will get difficult because the EU feels it has to defend itself against the risk of contagion and so has to make it seem that the UK is being punished. They have little confidence that their project can hold up on its merits, perhaps because it has so few.
        And, as you say, there are now more important international agencies which could oversee a more democratic and successful European project.


    1. Thank you for following our blog! Are you in Bulgaria? What do you think of our views of the EU? We are deeply sceptical of the supposed benefits of the EU, mainly because of their ideology of the super-state and the lack of democracy.
      Good luck with your blog; we will keep in touch.


  2. Just found your blog and hope in the near future to submit my own theory of what is actually happening and why. The evidence I have gathered suggests that ultimately the EU via a joint effort with Islam wishes to either have a shared project of an EU/ Arab alliance with the combined power, resourse and financial capital to compete with the USA and China, or use the same alliance to join a NEW World Order. No doubt the evidence could be interpreted in different ways but it does not negate the facts relating to what is actually happening in Europe. Please let me know if you are interested. I have been trying to get this information in the public domain for a long time but not with great success. I am not an Intellectual or university graduate but investigate the facts via a prism of common sense. I submit that I may have got caught up in my own bubble however your scrutiny of the evidence would be valuable to me even if you do not want to print.


    1. I’m mildly curious to see your evidence as it seems a big stretch to have the EU conspiring with ‘Islam”. First, many EU member states have a distaste for Moslems and, more generally, for Islam. Second, the EU is an organisation run by people while Islam is the generic title for a religion with many adherents who disagree with one another. Who represents ‘Islam’ in such a conspiracy? Or what Islamic organisation? Third, while I agree that the EU seeks to compete with the US and China, it does so explicitly not subversively. One of their claims for ‘Europe’ is that it needs a federal government to give it the scale it needs to compete. EU leaders push this argument and don’t seem to need any other organisation to join in; they would rather take the power for themselves.


      1. I will try today to collate the info and send it to you. For now please Google these. Barcelona Declaration when investigating this please click the blue print with the union flag. This opens more pages with icons to click. Not all work but some do. The Mediterranean Agreement is the strategy and the up to date version 2017 although as is the EU, s usual penchant for hiding their agenda in words of reason it is not as overt as the BD. I will send you the original copy of the Isesco Charter as it was too overt and has been replaced with another more pliable document that says the same thing but in a more nuanced way. The IOC document is explained on you tube and worth a watch. The charter of the BD is also explained on you tube. While examining these document the overriding question is: why would Merkel risk her political career, the Eurosceptism and civil unrest of the people by refusing to cap migrant numbers. For the same reason she is unable to form a coalition government. Why is anything relating to Christain heritage being ignored in favour of all things Islam. She is aware of the outrage it will cause if, in the latest episode the ECJ rules that in a particular case Sharia law can overide common
        law. This is the bulk of the info but I will try to submit it to you in an easier form. The BD starts with a Danish person writing to his PM demanding to know about this agreement and the ensuing reply. Thanks for your interest


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.