Readers' letters

We need to get out for a chance of progress

Sunday, 12th June 2016, 9:00 am
Updated Monday, 13th June 2016, 12:24 pm

The primary objective of the EU, since the formation of the EEC, has been to replace all the independent countries of Europe with an United States of Europe, within which former countries have little or no independence.

Our choice on June 23 will therefore be between leaving the EU and regaining our independence or staying and soon losing it completely.

No politician or voter has the moral, constitutional or legal right to give away our right to govern ourselves.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

If the EU feels it can ignore our proposals for better terms even when faced with the possibility of our leaving, there would be no prospect whatever of achieving them were we to stay.

Logically enough, given its objective of a single European State, the USE intends to have single legal and taxation systems, home, foreign, financial, trade, immigration and other policies, overseas embassies and armed forces loyal to the State. Our influence over them now is minimal, if we stay it would be zero.

The EU operates like a ratchet – one way only, towards its goal. No plan is ever abandoned, simply postponed until the next click of the ratchet is judged opportune.

For those reasons, no promise, concession or exemption can be relied on for more than a week, if that.

As in Alice in Wonderland, words in EU Treaties and documents mean what their authors wish them to mean at any particular time and in any particular context, invariably to their own advantage. Their interpretation or that of their European Court of Justice is always final.

Only outside this, do we stand any chance at all of freedom and progress.

After all, who would want to be under the control of the geniuses who dreamed up the Exchange Rate Mechanism, the euro that lead to massive unemployment across Southern Europe, the Working Time Directive that makes working long hours (as I did for 30 years) a criminal offence, the Schengen Agreement of open borders and the current migration crisis?

Idris Francis, address supplied

Law should apply to all

I am writing to complain about the double standards which seem to persist as regards smoking in enclosed spaces. This is against the law and therefore a crime.

Yet shisha cafes allow the smoking of shisha which is much more powerful and addictive than cigarettes. I know this because I have visited these cafes in Preston.

They don’t try to hide the fact you can smoke illegally.

I have reported this to Preston City Council. It said: “The legislation wasn’t designed to prevent this type of activity.”

We have double standards at play, along with political correctness. Everyone is scared of being called Islamophobic so they are treated with kid gloves.

If this is going on in the cafes in Preston, then I assume it is a nationwide problem.

If Preston City Council can’t deal successfully with these, the legislation needs amending and this needs to be addressed in Parliament.

If you disagree with these cafes getting away with breaking the law, write to the council and your MP. The law should apply equally to us all. People shouldn’t be allowed to pick and choose.

Hortense Feuchtwanger, Preston