a _make or break_ time for britain(capitals & conflict)

8/17/2019 A _make or Break_ Time for Britain(Capitals & Conflict)

1/14

27.4.2016 A "make or break" time for Britain

http://www.capitalandconflict.com/make-or-break-time-for-britain

A "make or break" timefor BritainA clampdown on non-doms. Taking away the tax advantages of private-

equity funds. A higher tax on dividends. As the election campaign gets

under way, the main political parties are rolling out policies one after


2/14


http://www.capitalandconflict.com/make-or-break-time-for-britain 2

another that will directly hurt the City.

- Why it’s not an exaggeration to call the EU: a blueprint for slavery

- The three ways the EU controls you every day

- What “Brexit” will do for the UK economy

You may 敠nd some of what follows controversial. You may even disagree

with it whole heartedly. But you owe it to yourself to hear both sides of the

story before you cast your vote.

Ultimately the most important vote you end up making will be with your

money. This report will also show you how to stay informed as the Brexit

vote approaches. The risks, the consequences, the opportunities… all the

economic and 敠nancial repercussions will be discussed in detail, on an

almost daily basis.

But 敠rst, to learn why the stakes are so high, and how we reached this

crucial moment of national decision, let me show you how we got here. It

begins with a plan.

The EU: a blueprint for Slavery


3/14



First let's begin with an important point. Being against the European Union

doesn’t mean you hate Europe. The EU is an organisation that’s trying to

increase its power, in the name of promoting unity in Europe.

For instance, you may well have voted in the 1974 referendum, held during

Edward Heath’s government. If you did, you’ll remember that the choice

back then was to become a part of a common European market… not the

European Union as we know it today.

Britain chose to join a club based on free trade, only to 敠nd that the rules

could be changed without our agreement… and that it’s nearly impossible

to leave. What began as an amiable and bene敠cial trading accord hasmorphed into a proxy parliament… and now into a prison.

The illusion of freedom and democracy remains… but the reality of the EU

has always been opposed to these values. The same is true across Europe.

Take the Treaty of Lisbon. Its 敠rst incarnation was the EU Constitution in

2005.

The people of France rejected it. So did the Netherlands.

And then what happened? Did the EU respect the decision of the people?

Nope. The legislation was recycled into the Treaty of Lisbon, and passed in

2009.

The idea that an unelected organisation can reach into the heart of a

sovereign state’s inner workings and DEMAND that the laws of the land

change is reprehensible.

But that is what is laid out in the EU’s operating manual… a recent issue of


4/14



the European Yearbook, published by the Council of Europe, states that:

The centre of decision of economic policy will be politically responsible to a

European Parliament...

These transfers of responsibility represent a process of fundamental

political signi敠cance…

Handing the control of your a㐮airs to a stranger is a recipe for disaster…

whether that’s the UK’s political leaders abdicating power to bureaucrats in

Brussels, or you as an investor handing control of your money to someone

else. It’s a bad idea either way.

The critical moment is right now…

Not once in the history of the EU has a nation like ours stood up and said

we’d be better o㐮 outside of it.

That is what our referendum is: a challenge.

It’s a direct threat to the EU’s real agenda – which is to concentrate political

and economic power in the hands of unelected elites.

That’s why our challenge terri敠es them.

Right now, we’re at a critical stage. There is no way to maintain the status

quo. We are at a fork in the road.

A ‘stay’ vote commits to the EU in ways we will never be able to undo. Over

the years, it will continue to centralise power, like a black hole sucking

everything towards itself, to strip us of our autonomy piece by piece.


5/14



A ‘no’ vote is the ultimate threat to the EU.

The EU already in敮uences a minimum of 13% of British laws directly… and

perhaps as many as 64%, depending on where you get your 敠gures.

It already regulates certain foods, important 敠nancial matters, climate

change rules, how many migrants can cross our border… and the list goes

on. In fact, the 100 most burdensome regulations cost the UK £33 billion a

year. It commandeers between £8 billion and £20 billion of taxpayer money

– your money – every year.

No matter what our politicians say, a ‘stay’ vote gives the EU a mandate to

reach across the channel and strip our nation of its sovereignty.

It happens with one little law… one obscure regulation… one

indecipherable directive at a time… until, one day, in the near future, the

ideas of freedom and liberty that Britain has stood by for centuries will

have been destroyed.

It’s only then that people will wake up and realise what the EU really is: a

blueprint for slavery.

The three ways the EU is gaining control

The EU may not openly control what Britain – or any other state – does, but

it advances its agenda subtly… largely unseen… and without restriction.

There are three particular methods the EU uses to increase its power.

Remember, it’s all about control.


6/14



Control #1: the money

As any Greek, Cypriot, Portuguese or Irish citizen will tell you, debt forces

nations to do things they’d never freely choose to do otherwise.

And it’s why the creation of the European Central Bank – and ultimately the

Euro – has been vital in helping the EU acquire power, something Margaret

Thatcher warned of in 1979:

“[In] that kind of Europe,” she said, “[there] is no democracy.” The point is

“having a single currency, a monetary policy and interest rates

which take all political power away from us .”

Thatcher was right then. But today, the EU’s control of the 敠nances also

a㐮ects you on a much more personal level.

For instance, did you know that at the start of 2016 the amount of money

you have guaranteed in any UK bank dropped from £85k to £75k, entirely

to bring it in line with EU ‘standards’?

It might seem innocuous now. But as the Cyprus “bail-in” showed, allowing


7/14



the EU to dictate the 敠nancial laws and regulations between you, your bank

and your government can have disastrous consequences.

Control #2: law making

Our elected Parliament should have the ultimate power to make laws in

Britain.

The EU has turned that rule on its head.

The European Court of Justice asserts its own supremacy over and above

the role of national parliaments. The UK’s parliamentary website explains:

“Provisions of EU law that are directly applicable or have direct e㐮ect, such

as EU Regulations or certain articles of the EU Treaties, are automatically…

incorporated and binding in national law without the need for a further

Act of Parliament .”

This idea has been challenged in court in several nations across Europe.

But the EU still asserts its own law-making supremacy above that of

national member state parliaments.

Again, it did this without the people of the EU ever having the choice.

But it’s the third control that causes the greatest concern.

Control #3: the language

Vladimir Lenin once said: “A lie told often enough becomes the truth.”


8/14



Take the Treaty of Rome. If you’re unfamiliar with this, it’s generally seen as

the o‰cial beginning of the EU in 1957 (or the European Economic

Community, as it was known back then). It committed the states to “ever

closer union among peoples.”

Those 敠ve innocuous-sounding little words gave generations of European

elites the weapon they needed to keep pushing for more Europe, closer

ties and more centralisation of power.

The EU charter nearly prevents any member nation from being able to

leave without receiving approval.

Consider Article 50.2 of the Charter:

“A Member state which decides to withdraw shall notify the European

Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the

European council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an

agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its

withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union.”

In other words, the rules state that we must negotiate our way out if we

decide to leave the EU. That means we sit at a table with the European

Council… and we cannot leave until they “agree” to terms

acceptable to them.

In short, it means that even if we vote to leave, the European Union can

dictate the TERMS we leave on.

In 2008, the people of Ireland clearly and decisively rejected the Treaty of

Lisbon.


9/14



But again, instead of listening to the people’s choice and dropping the bill,

the Irish were told to go back and do the vote again!

This time, in 2009, the ‘correct’ result came in.

That’s almost certainly what will happen if we vote to leave the Union. At

敠rst we’ll be told: “Go back and do it again.”

If that doesn’t work, the recriminations… sanctions… and heavy handed

negotiations will begin.

What Brexit will do for the economy

A more entrepreneurial, less bureaucratic British economy should be good

news for our economy.

But the reality, as Vicky Redwood of Capital Economics says, is that both the

purported gains and losses from Brexit are overstated.


10/14



Even if the EU imposed tari㐮s on UK exports, “this 4% cost would be fairly

easily absorbed” while any hit to EU trade would be o㐮set “over the long-

term by the extra opportunities to boost trade with emerging economies.”

There’s also the £10bn-odd in savings that the UK would make on its

contributions to the EU.

A big player in the debate is Britain’s 敠nance industry.

The City itself is split on our membership of the EU. And while the press

tends to assume that they act out of self-interest, a vocal minority speaks

from the heart.

For example, talking to hedge-fund manager Crispin Odey (an Outer), he’s

less concerned with the impact on his business one way or the other, than

with a desire to see British democracy fully restored.

But as far as the risk to the City goes, Michael Petley, chief executive of

investment manager of the ECU group, points out that the City was 100years or more in the making and has huge competitive advantages over

potential post-Brexit rivals.

London is a world leader in accounting, 敠nancial technology, regulatory

matters, banking and capital markets.

Petley reckons it would take 25 years to create a 敠nancial hub to replicate

this. On top of that, London’s success has brought in hundreds of

thousands of expatriates and their families from around the world.

A major 敠nancial centre needs schools, housing, hotels and an airline hub.


11/14



The population is 8.5 million, but it touches a multiple of that each day.

London is more than a city, it is a network – and that is irreplaceable.

Another big concern is trade.

The UK has a trade de敠cit with Europe – we buy more from them than they

buy from us. So a trade war is no more desirable for Europe than it is for

Britain.

And sure, new trade deals would have to be struck. But as Jonathan Lindsell

of the Civitas think tank points out: “Swiss negotiators close more deals

than the EU does, often with larger economies.”

Business for Britain has put together a detailed analysis of how a new trade

deal with the EU could be pre-negotiated before any Brexit. The rest would

quickly fall into place.

Steve Baker MP, head of Conservatives for Britain, notes that Britain is

already a member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

Under these rules, Europe must o㐮er us “most favoured nation” trading

status. As a result, says Baker, “our membership of the WTO defrays even

the worst-case scenario of trade barriers being erected under WTO rules if

we left”.

More broadly speaking, global trade tari㐮s have been falling under

globalisation.

Free trade bene敠ts all involved, so it is in no one’s interests to reverse that.

In any case, the EU promotes the trade in goods over services – it wasn’t

built for Britain, a world leader in services. And overall, the EU is becoming


12/14



less important in our overall trade mix.

The O‰ce for National Statistics states that the EU’s share of global GDP

has fallen from 30% in 1993 to 24% in 2013.

That re敮ects the growth of the emerging markets. The proportion of trade

accounted for by the EU “has fallen consistently since 1999”, reports the

ONS. In fact, as MEP Daniel Hannan points out, “Britain is the only EU state

that sells more outside the union than to other members.”

Conclusion: we should go on alone

We do not hate Europe... but we don’t have to like the EU.

Winston Churchill believed in a united Europe.

He wanted to see the free movement of goods, capital and labour, and

believed that free trade would bind nations together and create a lasting

peace.

But as he once said, “if you make 10,000 regulations you destroy all respect


13/14



for the law.” Excessive rules feed a bulging bureaucracy; they don’t create a

better European economy.

While the EU may have embraced free-market ideals early on, it has moved

away from them.

The EU’s actions and structures drive its members towards a centralised

social and political model, fed by high taxation.

In turn, that means that power will always 敮ow towards and serve the

interests of the biggest, most in敮uential partners in the EU – Germany and

France.

That attitude is holding back the rest of Europe, particularly those countries

locked into the euro. That’s a great pity. But we don’t have to remain part of

that.

There is no doubt that Britain would thrive alone. The EU in its current form

serves neither Britain nor Europe. It must undergo radical change. And if itcan’t or won’t, then Britain should go it alone.

P.S. I urge you to be cautious in the months ahead. Billion-dollar fund

manager Charlie Morris is warning that a Brexit vote will conjure up a

"storm" for investors. But there's still time to 敠nd safe harbour. Before the

Brexit vote begins, have a look at Charlie's message

(http://pro1.moneyweek.com/482506/) for private investors in this

special presentation.

http://pro1.moneyweek.com/482506/


14/14


(http://pro1.moneyweek.com/482506/)

(http://www.moneyweek.com)
http://pro1.moneyweek.com/482506/

a _make or break_ time for britain(capitals & conflict)

Documents