British parliament and the ‘crown’ will cease to exist when The Lisbon Treaty comes in to full effect on 1st November 2014, power will no longer reside in Westminster, but in Brussels.
The right of the British Parliament to legislate over us in 43 areas, will be removed and be made subject to approval by qualified majority voting, or QMV,
There are 43 areas that will be affected where parliament will be unable to carry out policy changes, amendments, or repealing etc.
Each member state will lose the right of veto (constitutional right to reject a decision or proposal made by a lawmaking body, exercise a veto against a decision or proposal).
The Lisbon Treaty
The Treaty of Lisbon (initially known as the Reform Treaty) is an international agreement which amends the two treaties which form the constitutional basis of the European Union (EU) and signed on 13 December 2007, and entered into force on 1 December 2009.
The signing of The Lisbon Treaty is treason and can be proven with the Bill of Rights 1689 and still in force, it, by definition, cannot be removed, changed or signed away by anyone, least of all Parliament.
And I doe declare That noe Forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within this Realme Soe helpe me God. – Bill of Rights 
In other words, we may not be ruled in any way, shape or form by any foreign entity.
Declaration of the Indigenous Peoples of the Isles of Britain
At this point,the people can either continue as Citizen under the EU or declare themselves as ‘a sovereign indigenous man under the jurisdiction of Natural Law’.
On 1st November at Stonehenge, a declaration for the indigenous peoples of the Isles of Britain will be read by Nomine Deus and anyone can turn up and support the declaration.
Hear Ye Hear Ye Hear Ye all people who now inhabit the formerly known in ancient times the Isles of Prydian, latterly known by force and deceit as the United Kingdom
All people of the land Hear Ye this proclamation and Declaration
We the people of the land hereby solemnly make notice and Declaration that we are the Indigenous peoples of this land.
Further we declare that we are no part of the society which declares itself to rule over us the indigenous people, for they have attained their position and wealth by diverse acts of subterfuge and theft of the resources which are ours by right to share amongst ourselves without favour or profit-making.
We the Indigenous peoples reclaim our ancient birthrights and customs from the treasonous elites who have hidden the same from us for generations, seeking to enrich themselves from our common resources at the expense and ensuing poverty of the peoples whom have become enslaved in the system set up for the elites sole benefit. (read full declaration)
Withdrawal from the EU
An online petition, WITHDRAWAL OF THE UK FROM THE EU USING ARTICLE 50 OF THE LISBON TREATY BY 1ST NOV 2014 (38.Degrees) has gathered over 11,000 signatures.
The petition is demanding the coalition government withdraw from the EU effective immediately .
The 43 areas:
1) Administrative cooperation,
3) Border Controls,
4) Citizens initiative regulations,
5) Civil Protection,
6) Committee of the regions,
7) Common Defence Policy,
8) Crime prevention incentives,
9) Criminal judicial cooperation,
10) Criminal Law
12) Diplomatic judicial cooperation,
13) Economic Social Committee,
14) Emergency International aid,
16) EU Budget,
18) European Central Bank,
19) European Court of Justice,
21) Eurozone external representation,
22) Foreign Affairs High Representation Election,
23) Freedom of Movement of Workers,
24) Freedom to Establish a Business,
25) Freedom, Security, Justice, cooperation & evaluation policy,
26) Funding the Common Foreign & Security Policy,
27) General economic interest services,
28) Humanitarian Aid,
30) Intellectual property
31) Organisation of the Council of the EU,
32) Police cooperation,
33) President of the European Council election,
34) Response to natural disaster & terrorism,
35) Rules concerning the Armaments Agency,
36) Self-employment rights,
37) Social Security Unanimity,
40) Structural & Cohesion Funds,
43) Withdrawal of a member state
The Government’s Home Secretary, Theresa May gave a speech at a Conservative Friends Of Israel reception.
Here is her full speech:
“Thank you, Stuart. It’s a pleasure to be here with fellow Conservative Friends of Israel, and it’s a particular pleasure to be here in the company of you, Mr Ambassador.
It seems fitting that we have gathered here in the Attlee Room of Portcullis House, since Clement Attlee was the British Prime Minister on May 14, 1948, when David Ben Gurion proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel.
While the experience of the British Mandate after the Second World War was difficult to say the least, Britain, of course, played a significant part in the story of the creation of the State of Israel.
The Balfour Declaration, which lent Britain’s support to the creation of a Jewish national home in Palestine, was issued in 1917 by Arthur James Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary. The Balfour Declaration said this:
“His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”
Those words stand out because they were such a bold declaration of intent to allow for the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. But almost a century later, they also stand out because they pose exactly the dilemma posed by the Arab/Israeli conflict today. How do we ensure that Israel has the safety and security its citizens deserve? How do the Palestinian people get the self-representation they desire? What can we do – and here in Britain this is still shamefully a topical question – what can we do to prevent anti-Semitism in this country and across Europe?
I have been appalled by recent reports from the Community Security Trust indicating a rise in anti-Semitic attacks in the UK. Yesterday I along with Theresa Villiers met Mike Freer MP, David Burrows MP and Lee Scott MP to discuss their concerns and the action the Home Office is taking to combat anti-Semitic hate crime.
Accounts of Jewish people being verbally abused on the street, placards displaying loathsome threats, and bricks being thrown through synagogue windows are – like any form of hate crime – abhorrent and unacceptable.
A straw poll conducted by the Jewish Chronicle also found that 63 per cent of Jewish people in north London questioned their future in the UK amid the rise of anti-Semitic attacks. This picture is being mirrored in other European countries. France has recently been reported as the leading country for Jewish emigration to Israel for the first time.
I am clear that everyone in this country should be able to live their lives free from racial and religious hatred and harassment. No one should live in fear because of their beliefs or who they are. That’s why we have provided over £2.3 million of funding to organisations and schools to help prevent hate crime, increase reporting and improve the operational response.
We have also established a working group to tackle anti-Semitism, which brings together community representatives and experts from across Government to help explore issues affecting Jewish communities. And we are working closely with the police and criminal justice agencies to encourage victims to report incidents, for instance through third-party services and the True Vision website.
This country has one of the strongest legislative frameworks in the world to protect communities from hostility, violence and bigotry. But I am clear that we must keep both the operational and legislative response under constant review. There is absolutely no place in our country for anti-Semitism whatever form it takes.
Daniel Taub is a Israel’s Ambassador to the United
Earlier this year, I had the privilege of visiting Israel and the Palestinian Territories for the first time. The purpose of my trip was to meet experts in cyber security and to see for myself the progress the Israelis have made in combating modern slavery.
Because while it is not well known, Israel was the first country in the world to pass groundbreaking anti-trafficking legislation. In those respects, my visit was really very useful, but what I learned was overshadowed by the terrible news that emerged during my stay that the bodies of three missing Israeli teenagers had been found near Halhul in the West Bank.
The murder of those boys – and the loss of life among Israelis and Palestinians in the subsequent military operations in Gaza – is a sad reminder that the Arab/Israeli conflict is not just an abstract debate argued over the pages of Western newspapers and television screens.
It is a real conflict with innocent victims on both sides. It is about self-identity for the Palestinian people. And it is about Israel’s right to defend its citizens from indiscriminate terrorist attacks and existential threats.
It is worth re-stating the threats faced by Israel because they are considerable. There are the familiar but deadly threats from Hamas and Hezbollah.
The collapse of Syria that has spawned ISIS and threatens to destabilise Lebanon and Jordan. The instability of the wider region. And the threats issued to Israel by Iran. No democratic government could, in the face of such danger, do anything but maintain a strong defence and security capability and be prepared to deploy it if necessary. That is why I – and the whole British Government – will always defend Israel’s right to defend itself.
Those of us who are sympathetic to Israel’s security predicament must always make clear that the loss of any civilian life – whatever the nationality of the victim – is an appalling tragedy. And we must remember that there will be no lasting peace or justice in the region until the Palestinian people are able to enjoy full civil rights themselves.
I say this not because I want to make a naïve and platitudinous point about the necessity of a two-state solution. When Israel faces the full range of threats I have just listed, when Israel faces enemies that are intent on its very destruction, when Hamas uses Palestinian civilians as human shields for its rockets, when there are thousands of Israeli settlers living in the West Bank, it is easy to talk about a two-state solution but almost impossible to know how to move towards one.
But that does not mean we can afford to give up. Taking even the smallest of steps towards a lasting peaceful settlement will take acts of huge political bravery and great statesmanship on both sides of the divide – but they are steps that need to be taken.”
Published time: September 19, 2014 16:27
Edited time: September 20, 2014 14:08
At a time when Britain’s media lens remains firmly fixed on the outcome of the Scottish referendum, the UK government has quietly pushed through a Lobbying Act that critics claim is highly undemocratic.
Enshrined in law on Friday, the anti-Lobbying Bill raises serious concerns about an ever-increasing democratic deficit in the United Kingdom. The legislation seeks to impose stringent limits on the amount of money think tanks, charities, NGOs, trade unions, and campaign groupscan allocate towards political lobbying during electoral campaigns.
Following its addition to Britain’s statue books, trade unionists and rights activists throughout the nation have condemned the bill, arguing it compromises the political leverage of all UK organisations other than political parties.
Aptly dubbed the Gagging Act, the bill will also drastically reduce the amount of money such organisations can allocate to newspaper advertising, while ensuring they are held accountable for every penny they spend – even on postage stamps.
But no such restrictions will be placed on electioneering propaganda published in newspapers or on political parties’ election spending. In light of this fact, critics argue the legislation is de-facto pro-establishment, allowing UK political parties, particularly the Tories, to continue drawing millions from corporate and financial elites that tend to donate in pursuit of a very specific set of political and economic interests.
General secretary of the Trade Union Congress (TUC), Francis O’Grady, has denounced the government's anti-lobbying bill as an attack on free speech. (image from www.tuc.org.uk)
The bill surfaced as Parliament broke for the summer, and was debated when MPs returned. Because it effectively silences trade unions and campaign groups across the political spectrum, it has been described by the general secretary of the Trade Union Congress (TUC) as a “chilling attack on free speech.”
Redefining political participation
Awkwardly entitled the ‘Transparency of Lobbying, non-Party Campaigning, and Trade Union Administration Bill’, the legislation will criminalize any attempt by the TUC or other campaign group to organize an annual meeting or national demonstration for an entire year leading up to the 2015 general election. It will achieve this by introducing three primary regulatory changes governing campaigning for non-party organizations.
Firstly, the Act reframes what counts as political campaigning. Previously, only activities initiated with intent to influence electoral results were regulated. But under the new legislation, the government will regulate actions that may affect election results. Because criticism of government policy could influence voters, this legislative change will obstruct UK charities, NGOs and campaign groups’ capacity to criticize Westminister rule during electoral campaigns.
The British government has been accused of manipulating an anti-lobbing bill to silence political opponents, and mitigate dissent prior to the general election in 2015. (AFP Photo / Carl Court)
Secondly, the bill reduces the spending limit for non-political party campaigning 12 months prior to an election by over fifty percent. Under the new legislation, such expenditure is confined to a paltry £390,000. When plans to introduce these spending limits first emerged, Labour denounced the proposal as“sinister and partisan.”Nevertheless, they have now been enshrined in law.
Thirdly, the bill factors staff time and menial office costs into its restrictions on spending. Up until now, only the costs of election-oriented materials, adverts and activities were regulated. But under the new bill, staff time along with other costs will be factored into the meager £390,000 limit.
Stamping out dissent
Critics claim this rushed piece of legislation had little to do with cultivating greater transparency in the field of lobbying or eradicating the influence of big business on policy. Rather, they argue it amounts to a crude, biased and politically motivated assault on British democracy – particularly on UK trade unions.
The legislation is so comprehensive, its overall effect is to silence and criminalize dissent 12 months prior to any major election.
According to Labour's Alexandra Runswick, who also acts as director of Unlock Democracy, the Lobbying Bill is extremely regressive, and will make "transparency and lobbying worse in the UK."
Dave Prentis, general secretary of Unison, a public service union, sharply criticized the bill, which he described as a “pernicious law.”“It’s cynical, mean and vindictive. Trade unions have always been transparent and truthful about their activities and are already the most over-regulated organizations in the country,” he argued.
Dave Prentis (AFP Photo / Paul Ellis)
The Hope Not Hate campaign, which has played a prominent role in challenging racists, fascists and far-right political figures, warned the Act would reduce its spending by 70 percent leading up to the election.
The Act was initially drawn up to control the lobbying of governments by powerful elites with vested interests, following a “cash-for-favors” scandal in which a Tory MP was implicated. But the British government has been accused of ultimately manipulating the legislation to silence political opponents, and mitigate dissent prior to the 2015 general election.
General union GMB political officer Lisa Johnson said: “With the track record of the government on the economy and living, and with a general election round the corner, it is clear that they want to gag unions and charities too. It is shameful that parliament allowed this legislation onto the statue book. This shoddy and completely impractical bill allows Tory donors and the politically motivated right-wing press to run rough shod over our democracy.”