Dear Helen, a timely article given the Federal election this year in Australia and the two “interesting” State elections in South Australia and Tasmania. I’ve had extensive dialogue with a colleague of mine in the UK over the last 12 months. This has highlighted not only some of the fundamental influences in UK politics, but some of the potential corollaries with Australian politics.

One of the key problems we have observed in UK politics, is that since joining the EU, there has been the loss of sovereignty in domestic politics, economics, industry and energy security in particular. I draw on some recent examples of these in the hope that you may be able to comment from a legal perspective. There are also some interesting parallels with both Australian policy proposals and even recent election results.

Domestic politics has undoubtedly drifted to the left for all parties in both countries, (at least until Tony Abbot took a lurch to the right here). In the UK this seems to be driven by the need to fit into the “spectrum of popularity” created and promoted by the EU and the media. As a result, differentiation between party politics is almost impossible to detect. Tasmania and S.A. elections are perhaps our example of this phenomenon.

The UK has lost much of its industrial sovereignty. One of the best examples I can quote is the closure of the Redcar Steel Works with the loss of 1,700 jobs. What is more tragic is that this plant is owned by Corus, registered in Holland. The relocation of the plant to Holland was subsidized by EU “carbon” money. Corus is owned by the Indian Industrial giant TATA, who promptly claimed a further E600m in carbon credits. The EU rules prevent the UK government from compensating the Redcar Plant workers who lost their jobs. Now Land Rover/Jaguar is owned by TATA and MG cars have gone to China.

Continued:

Continued:

Energy Security; at least two power plants have to be closed due to EU emissions regulations, replacements are scheduled to be gas powered with gas supplied by Russia? Energy generation has been sold to the French and the consumer services and billing “outsourced” to TATA in India. Wind Farms are, to use an expression from my UK colleague, “eye wateringly expensive and inefficient”. Recent surveys showed the best performer to be only 32% efficient with the rest at less than 10%. The French have agreed to deliver Gordon Brown’s “New Nuclear builds Program”, providing however, it is funded by the UK who, unfortunately, can’t afford it because they’re broke and no longer own that industry.

It has to be noted also, that much of the UK’s most pristine countryside is scheduled to be “visually and noise” polluted by yet more wind farms. All dictated by EU policy at weak, tokenistic, populist and compliant UK politics.

It seems that the EU has developed a mutated form of socialism, now infecting much of the EU, by which it can operate command and control. UK politics seems to have been the most vulnerable.

As you point out, devolution has diminished and fragmented the down stream policy effectiveness and the EU regulatory environment appears to have usurped domestic policy control.

In Australia we have examples of the political wash-up of limited differentiation between parties, as per Tasmania and S.A; this is in spite of a swing to the opposition of between 7% and 12%. We also have an example of the threat to State Sovereignty as the Rudd government seeks to quarantine 30% of State GST revenues to fund reformed Health Economics.

Whilst Australians might not understand much about UK politics, there are many UK policies we can retrospectively observe as failed, and perhaps avoid making similar mistakes here. Our recent “hung” politics might also be reminder to the UK voters of the consequences of lack of political differentiation. David Cameron please note