BOOKLETS have been produced to reassure those concerned with the European Union's renamed "Amending Treaty".
Various methods are used in this booklet to disguise the loss of democratic power in January. Many implications are simply untrue.
It implies we owe all our European exports to the EU. Our trade was greater before we joined and would continue if we left. "Facts" such as "the EU keeps the peace" distort the truth or are debatable at best.
A country's present sovereignty may prevent the EU from "operating more effectively". Well, tough. If the EU wishes to "deliver what Europe's citizens want", why does it mainly deal with heads of industry and random politicians? Why does it operate in secret?
Phrases such as "international agreements" conjure up the image of meetings held between prime ministers in the glare of publicity.
The EU's "international agreements" are majority decisions from secret meetings, without minutes, held between a few civil servants who happen to be born around the continent, having who knows what motivations and priorities.
Westminster retains "social legislation", common law/police, judicial powers, a foreign and defence policy, tax and social security system, for now. And if we don't like it, too bad.
Charlotte Bull, UK Independence Party, Darlington.
RE Bill Morehead's letter on the latest EU Treaty (HAS, Sept 19). He seems to be saying there's no need for a referendum on the latest treaty, the workings of the EU should be explained to the public and why go to the expense of a referendum on the new treaty.
I believe we were promised by the last Labour leader (albeit reluctantly) a referendum on the original treaty on the EU constitution, but like the other one on the EMU (Economic and Monetary Union) - an empty promise.
Mr Morehead goes on to say there is a need for information to enable the public to gain an understanding of the workings of the EU.
Well, for more than 30 years now we have never been told the truth by the three main parties anyway - ie, it's undemocratic, takes away our sovereignty, is very expensive and corrupt. Do you think that any of the three major parties are going to come clean now?
Finally, Mr Morehead says why go to the expense of a referendum.
Surely no price would be too high for the people to be able to say who rules over Britannia.
George Springer, Hartlepool.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article