This article was sent to me by a regular Truth teller. I appreciate it and recognise the writer of this article has good intent. However, I know in my heart that this type of article is absolutely futile. It is equivalent of the endless online partitions, organised demonstrations, etc, etc. They are hopeless against the ubiquitous corruption. Because ALL of these people in this filthy corrupt system only care about one thing only …..their SELF INTERESTS. They are spineless, self-serving, careerists; entrenched in kudos and lacking any moral fibre. Spiritually void individuals – all of them.
However, the points that the author of this article makes are indeed valid. We can just hope that this type of article is sent out there into the ethos, as a tiny crumb of Truth, as part of the bigger picture.
Dear Ministry of Justice,
I am writing to you out of concern for my fellow British citizens, many of whom are suffering serious poverty under this present Government’s Austerity programme. I am most disturbed by the news that said Government rejected EU funding for food banks, which could have reached £22m for Britain.
A document from the Department of Work and Pensions explains Britain’s reasons for refusal to the EU;
“The UK government does not support the proposal for a regulation on the fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived. It believes that measures of this type are better and more efficiently delivered by individual member states through their own social programmes, and their regional and local authorities, who are best placed to identify and meet the needs of deprived people in their countries and communities. It therefore questions whether the commission’s proposal is justified in accordance with the principle of *subsidiarity.”
The principle of subsidiarity is defined in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. It ensures that decisions are taken as closely as possible to the citizen and that constant checks are made to verify that action at Union level is justified in light of the possibilities available at national, regional or local level. Specifically, it is the principle whereby the Union does not take action (except in the areas that fall within its exclusive competence), unless it is more effective than action taken at national, regional or local level. It is closely bound up with the principle of proportionality, which requires that any action by the Union should not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the *Treaties.
The Edinburgh European Council of December 1992 issued a declaration on the principle of subsidiarity that laid down the rules for its application. The Treaty of Amsterdam took up the approach that followed from this declaration in a Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. Following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon on 1 December 2009, the Protocol now requires the principle of subsidiarity to be respected in all draft legislative acts and allows national parliaments to object to a proposal on the grounds that it breaches the principle, as a result of which the proposal may be maintained, amended or withdrawn by the Commission, or blocked by the European Parliament or the Council. In the case of a breach of the principle of subsidiarity, the Committee of the Regions may also refer directly to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
*Treaty on European UnionTitle 1, Common Provisions. The first deals with common provisions. Article 1 establishes the European Union on the basis of the European Community and lays out the legal value of the treaties. The second article states that the EU is “founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.” The member states share a “society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail”.
Article iii then states the aims of the EU in six points. The first is simply to promote peace, European values and its citizens’ well-being. The second relates to free movement with external border controls are in place. Point 3 deals with the internal market. Point 4 establishes the euro. Point 5 states the EU shall promote its values, contribute to eradicating poverty, observe human rights and respect the charter of the United Nations. The final sixth point states that the EU shall pursue these objectives by “appropriate means” according with its competences given in the treaties.
According to the above information the European Union is acting lawfully in offering humanitarian aid to its member states during a time of need. Clearly, Britain is suffering economic collapse and the State cannot afford to adequately maintain public services or Welfare – British people and EU members both working and unemployed are forced to rely on foodbanks to feed themselves and their families. These foodbanks are almost entirely dependent on charitable donations from food stores and the general public with “Foodbank Donation” trolleys now a regular feature in many supermarkets across Britain.
Rapidly falling wages and rapidly rising costs of living leave many families living on or below the breadline. Zero Hour contracts are leaving people suddenly without income and with a long waiting period of over 5 weeks between claiming a Benefit and actually receiving it. Many people on Benefits are being denied income via DWP errors, tardiness and/or sanctions. Regardless of DWP’s willingness to deliver claimants legal entitlement, those claimants as EU Members and British Citizens do nonetheless, have HUMAN RIGHTS and they do have a right to EAT.
When Sate-run institutions like DWP KNOWINGLY leave people with NO income and in full knowledge that person has NO work to provide an income, they are in fact, acting in breach of ‘Common Provisions’ which DWP was established specifically to deliver on behalf of a lawful Government serving and upholding the laws & treaties of both Britain and the E.U.
The action of leaving people with no income and also, REFUSING to accept E.U. assistance during a time of national emergency which has left over 1 million people dependent on foodbanks, has put British people and our children at risk;
‘Millions of the poorest people in Britain are struggling to get enough food to maintain their body weight, according to official figures published this month.
The Government’s Family Food report reveals that the poorest 10 per cent of the population – some 6.4 million people – ate an average of 1,997 calories a day last year, compared with the average guideline figure of about 2,080 calories. This data covers all age groups.‘
Where people are buying food they are forced to cut back on other necessities like heating.
The present Government’s refusal to accept E.U. funding for UK foodbanks is further in breach of The E.U. Treaty in that; ” The member states share a “society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail” – because that SAME Government has fought very hard to hold onto E.U. funding for the very richest landowners of Britain and which include Benefits Minister, Iain Duncan Smith:
‘George Monbiot. The Guardian, Monday 1 July 2013 20.30 BST
‘It’s the silence that puzzles me. Last week the chancellor stood up in parliament to announce that benefits for the very poor would be cut yet again. On the same day, in Luxembourg, the British government battled to maintain benefits for the very rich. It won. As a result, some of the richest people in the country will each continue to receive millions of pounds in income support from taxpayers.
‘The minister responsible for cutting income support for the poor, Iain Duncan Smith, lives on an estate owned by his wife’s family. During the last 10 years it has received €1.5m in income support from taxpayers. ‘Thanks in large part to subsidies, the value of farmland in the UK has tripled in 10 years: it has risen faster than almost any other speculative asset. Farmers are exempted from inheritance tax and capital gains tax. They can build, without planning permission, structures which lesser mortals would be forbidden to erect, boosting both their capital and income. And they have a guaranteed income from the state.‘
In light of the evidence, the present Government has clearly behaved with discrimination against the poorest people of Britain in that it has refused to respect their needs and in fact, has conspired to impound that need by implementing a severe programme of austerity that has seen major cuts in public spending with jobs and wages in all public services being axed. Many unemployed are left with no choice but to work on a DWP training scheme in return for their ‘Benefits’/Job-Seekers-Allowance and this, a sum so paltry it barely covers an average household’s weekly shop.
The need for well-stocked foodbanks is therefore paramount during a time of economic austerity in which the British Government and its private-sector, can no longer afford to fully support its public in either jobs or Benefits: Since a Democratic and lawful Government of Britain exists in the first place to serve the best and collective interests of its electorate i.e. the Sovereign citizens of the United Kingdom, then any Government who acts in ignorance of the laws set to serve and protect its electorate has by its own act of ignorance, put the British people and children at RISK.
Consider the DWP statement on behalf of this government again:
“The UK government does not support the proposal for a regulation on the fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived. It believes that measures of this type are better and more efficiently delivered by individual member states through their own social programmes, and their regional and local authorities, who are best placed to identify and meet the needs of deprived people in their countries and communities. It therefore questions whether the commission’s proposal is justified in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.”
DWP itself is actively engaged in denying British people’s legal entitlement to Benefits and, considering the major ‘Austerity’ cuts in ALL public services, WHAT “social programmes, and their regional and local authorities” are “best placed to identify and meet the needs of deprived people in their countries and communities“?
Is the DWP in its declining of EU Aid, “MORE EFFICIENTLY” ensuring UK ‘citizens well-being‘?
In reality, there is very little save for charity and charity is NOT part of the E.U. Treaty for Human Rights is it? People do not have a right to CHARITY, human beings have a RIGHT to DIGNITY and leaving people, even, working people with no means to buy enough FOOD to live should NOT mean they are forced to BEG on the streets – dignity demands at the very LEAST, decently stocked foodbanks that offer a degree of CHOICE. For a Government to then refuse E.U. funding for this purpose, is truly a travesty of the E.U. Treaty because that Government has behaved discriminately toward a portion of its electorate in that it has refused E.U. Aid to help those people and simultaneously, is cutting social, regional and local authorities budgets that would ordinarily have provided aid.
This is nothing less than an economic attack against the people of Britain and in light of this, Austerity itself, can reasonably be perceived as specifically designed to dramatically lower the living standards of British people and driving our nation ever deeper into collective, national debt. People are losing jobs, homes, income, pensions, rights and property. This Government nor any on offer, has offered any solid plans or prospects for a viable way out of this situation and indeed, Cameron himself has stated that Austerity is to be “permanent”.
Something has gone wrong somewhere because according to the present circumstances of Britain today, we are basically being told that economic interests of privately owned Banks have an automatic RIGHT to benefit from and be bailed out by, massive public spending and INTEREST-FREE public loans, which the public ARE charged interest on via the World Bank – and, that the Bankers interests and needs will be satisfied without our democratic consent or consultation and even, their obvious crimes and fraud will be IGNORED.
On the otherhand, 0.05% Benefit fraud is blown-up out of all proportion with millions of British people being suddenly stripped of their Benefits and forced through lengthy appeals, with over 10,000 driven to suicide in the first YEAR alone.
Again, this persecution against people dependent on Benefits is CLEAR discrimination between rich and poor: ‘Point 5 states the EU shall promote its values [and] contribute to eradicating poverty.‘ Are British people to now assume that ‘ERADICATING POVERTY‘ includes driving poor and vulnerable people to early death and/or suicide by denying them their Human Rights?
Since THE fundamental benefit of the E.U. is to improve living standards of the EU nations, any nation that conspires to do the opposite is therefore, operating outside of E.U. law. This Government’s refusal to accept E.U. aid for Britain’s poor, possibly, reflects a conspiracy to drive the very poorest and most vulnerable of the UK population into financial ruin and despair. The suicide notes and testimony of family and friends bear witness to the undeniable FACT that this present Government’s ‘Austerity’ programme has directly determined people to take their own lives due to a sudden removal of Benefits that were and are their LIFE LINE and without which, they cannot LIVE.
The same time Austerity imposes cuts on Benefits and Public spending, the rich are given bonuses and tax-breaks:
‘When the financial system went into meltdown in 2008, it was not expected to stand on its own two feet, or to pull itself up by its bootstraps. Instead, it was saved by the state, becoming Britain’s most lavished benefit claimant.
More than £1trillion of public money was poured into the banks following the financial collapse. The emergency package came with few government-imposed conditions and with little calling to account. “The urge to punish all bankers has gone far enough,” declared a piece in the Financial Times just six months after the crisis began.
In 2012, 2,714 British bankers were paid more than €1m – 12 times as many as any other EU country.
When the EU unveiled proposals in 2012 to limit bonuses to either one or two years’ salary with the say-so of shareholders, there was fury in the City: at the British taxpayers’ expense, the Treasury took to the European Court to challenge the proposals.
The entire British government demonstrated, not for the first time, that it was one giant lobbying operation for the City of London. Between 2011 and 2013, bank lending fell in more than 80% of Britain’s 120 postcode areas, helping to stifle economic recovery.’ http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/aug/29/socialism-for-the-rich
So, after the public is FORCED to borrow massive sums to bail out privately owned banks, the banks AND the Government immediately begin to RESTRICT the amount of money available to the British public via axing of jobs, wages, benefits, and loans and this actually HELPED to ‘stifle economic recovery’.
The British people have witnessed this Government pour its energies and even, public money into fighting against the E.U. on behalf maintaining funds & income for Bankers and Landowners – many of whom are not even British and yet, when it comes to the E.U. honouring its lawful obligation in recognising the needs of British people and our government’s unwillingness and/or inability to cover those needs, the E.U. offer of help is REJECTED and on the grounds that they; “question whether the commission’s proposal is justified in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity”?
According to my understanding one of the terms of subsidiarity includes; ‘Article 222, the Solidarity clause; states that members shall come to the aid of a fellow member who is subject to a terrorist attack, natural disaster or man-made disaster. This includes the use of military force. ‘
The very fact that this Government has QUESTIONED E.U offer of foodbank-aid according to the principles of subsidiarity, is itself a DAMNING indictment of this Government’s TRUE agenda which is reflected in their ‘Austerity-Programme’ because essentially, by citing the principles of subsidiarity, this Government is claiming that the E.U. offer of funds for foodbanks, is going “beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties” and, that this Government’s OWN actions to stock Britain’s foodbanks are “more effective” – when very clearly, they are not.
The Government’s referral to the principle of subsidiarity is a flimsy effort toward adding a veneer of legality over their uttely obscene refusal of aid to the poorest people of Britain who are struggling now under a huge, national debt that is largely the result of massive bailouts to mostly criminal, private banks on whose behalf, this same Government has successfully challenged the E.U. in maintaining and increasing their collective benefits from E.U. funds.
The E.U. is most certainly NOT going ‘beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties’ by offering funds to stock UK foodbanks. The E.U. accepts the FACT that its funding, in light of UK Austerity, will be more ‘effective than action taken at national, regional or local level.’ These facts are UNDENIABLE and therefore, this Government is WRONG to refuse E.U. funds for UK foodbanks and IS acting in BREACH of the E.U Treaty and has no LAWFUL grounds for refusing that funding and indeed, the very fact they HAVE refused that funding calls into question the legal validity of any such Government that would fight for E.U funding for the richest of its nation and yet then, BLOCK E.U funding for the poor on grounds of the ‘principle of subsidiarity ‘?
The implication that E.U. funds for the poor of Britain are somehow, disrupting this Government’s national & regional economic policy CANNOT be avoided and this in turn, raises the suspicion and even a criminal charge of, conspiracy to deny British people their lawful rights and provisions via a process of Government discrimination that favours funding for the rich at the expense and ignorance of funding needs of the poor.
When people are being driven to suicide with an estimated 50,000+ deaths related directly to Austerity, this deliberate deprivation of both human rights and income is tantamount to an economic attack on the poorest and most vulnerable among UK public. And, because people have lost their lives and are losing their possessions, homes and health and even, our collective national assets such as NHS lands and buildings etc. and also, with many public services now denied, this is effectively, no different to a military-type terrorist attack in that it delivers the same blow to the targets; thousands dead and injured, thousands more left destitute, hopeless and homeless – even our NHS and health services are decimated.
Compared to the 7/7 terrorist attacks on London, the economic-terrorism inflicted against the British people by this present Government is 1,000 times worse both in scale and impact and this time, we have no “coalition-of-the-willing” among the gods of finance, to come “liberate” us all.
We DO however, have the coalition of the E.U. and the genuine principles of good faith in which original members first established its foundation; the people of Britain have the LAW and as Ministry of Justice, I urge YOU to investigate this matter of Cameron’s refusal of E.U. aid to stock UK foodbanks and if neccessary, to replace this present Government with an interim Government whilst charges of High Treason are investigated because I can assure you, the evidence yet presented here is merely, the tip of an iceberg.