YP Letters: Why Obama should not interfere in EU referendum

British Prime Minister David Cameron, left, speaks with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker during a round table meeting at the EU summit on the migration crisis.
British Prime Minister David Cameron, left, speaks with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker during a round table meeting at the EU summit on the migration crisis.
Have your say

From: Terry Palmer, South Lea Avenue, Hoyland, Barnsley.

THE resentment against President Obama’s plan to come to the UK and to speak in favour of the ‘Remainiacs’ continues to cause lively debate (David Owen, The Yorkshire Post, March 18).

I bet the Americans would not take kindly to foreigners tampering with their constitutional arrangements, and suggesting that the USA subject itself to supranational institutions, and yet that is what Obama proposes to do in Britain.

He proposes to exploit “the feel-good factor” of Her Majesty’s 90th birthday, and Shakespeare’s 400th anniversary to “reinforce his plea”. I should have thought that two such quintessentially British institutions as the Monarch and the Bard would have the reverse effect.

From: Ian Smith, Colston Close, Bradford.

YOUR correspondent Gary Mason suggests that the Leave EU campaigners should make a convincing argument that the UK would benefit from an exit (The Yorkshire Post, March 15).

I imagine that the entire group of ‘Out’ campaigners would have immigration, red tape and sovereignty, as he mentions, on their lists of reason to leave.

Added to them would be democracy of course – deciding upon our own governing every few years, with the ability, supported by the media, to hold Parliamentarians to account in between; plus fewer mandarins to kowtow to. Then there’s financial control – instead of giving £1 to the EU and receiving 35p in return, we’d keep that pound to spend more effectively on the myriad of causes in the UK, including farmers and the NHS he refers to. Better people can elucidate upon the Leave EU cause, but if these points are amongst their claims, then they’ve convinced me.

From: Ralph H Sutcliffe, Sands Lane, Mirfield.

BOTH sides in the EU debate have a view on what they believe will happen after the referendum on June 23, but the reality is that nobody knows so let us look at what is not in dispute and is unlikely to change:

Official population projections indicate that if net migration averages 185,000 a year over the next 25 years, our population is set to grow by nearly 10 million. That’s 10 more cities the size of Birmingham. To put that in context, the current rate is 330,000 a year.

The EU turns a blind eye to corruption and waste. The UK contributes around £33m per day net in contributions to the EU. Much of our law-making is determined in Brussels by bureaucrats who have no accountability to UK voters. The balance of trade is hugely in the EU’s favour. It is perhaps significant the above assertions receive little attention from the ‘Remain’ campaigners. Could it be that, deep down, they don’t believe they have a case to make?

From: Les Arnott, Athelstan Road, Sheffield.

JOHN S Murray’s letter (The Yorkshire Post, March 17) made me laugh before I realised how badly some have been duped.

This man is prepared to sell our sovereignty; accept corruption, welcome bureaucracy; see us swamped by immigration; have us turned into paupers – all so going through passport control is not too arduous?

He argues in favour of the euro – well, the EU will still have it! He argues that he wants to work, study and holiday in the EU. Well, what will stop him? I studied at university pre-Common Market/EU in Madrid - and worked, too! I was also permitted to go on holidays throughout Europe.

From: G Wright, Fieldside Court, Tadcaster.

A NUMBER of correspondents have emphasised the need for more objective information on the Brexit question as opposed to the subjective and often emotional views peddled by the leading spokespersons for the various interested parties. The EU has 27 departments, headed by unelected Commissioners from member states with offices, staff, budgets and some with separate Press offices. At the head of these departments is Jean-Claude Juncker, whose claim to fame is that of having been President of Luxemburg, which has a population smaller than Leeds. All of these departments have responsibility which in some cases are vague and others overlapping or duplicated.

Of the 27 Commissioner heads of departments, perusal of their CVs show only five have participated in commerce, trade or wealth creation.

Given that one department has a remit for “foreign affairs” another for “enlargement negotiations” and yet another for “international negotiations”, it seems surprising that the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, has been engaged in advising Albania on steps needed in the preparation of its application for EU membership.

From: Nick Martinek, Briarlyn Road, Huddersfield.

WHEN the UK signs a normal treaty, the specific agreement is limited and unchanging. Unlike treaties signed with the EU, the treaties of Rome, SEA, Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice, Lisbon (by way of Spinelli, and the Constitution) to create the TEU and TFEU, have all increased the power of the EU step by step.

EU treaties are enablers rather than specific agreements. This results in the continual transfer of power from the nation state to the EU in a one-way process that is so well known that it is called “the ratchet”.

There is no evidence this would not continue, either. Leaving the EU is not a cure for politicians, like David Cameron, who don’t want independence for our country, but it’s a start.