Headlines

 

Mike gave out laminated maps of Europe to aid his talk, as well as manifestos covering the rest of UKIP’s policy. Mike gave an interesting insight into the EU’s effect on the UK and where UKIP stand on issues ranging from immigration to climate change. Many students offered well thought-out and challenging questions for the experienced MEP, offering close scrutiny of UKIP policy.

 

Mike began his talk with the frequently drummed out "fact" that the EU now makes 75% of our legislation and then developed this idea around four main areas.

 

Firstly, being a business owner, he focused on the question of whether it was necessary for the UK to be a member of the EU in order to trade with it. He believes that that even if the UK left the EU, it wouldn’t stop trading with us. Furthermore, he argued that it would actually be more damaging for EU countries to stop trading with us as they export their goods here. It simply wouldn’t be in their best interests to do so. His argument was that if the UK left the EU, it would be better for the UK as we could trade on our terms. Mike stated that we could then trade with the world in a more competitive and beneficial way, with countries such as India, and without the legislation and red tape that restricts our trade (such as the "fiasco" of the legislation directing the size of fruit); we would be able to trade in a much more independent and liberated way like countries such as Canada.

 

I did hope somebody would mention that the Citroën car company (among other companies who have invested in the UK) have announced they would cease to manufacture in the UK if we left the EU. Alas, it wasn’t to be.

 

Secondly, he reminded those gathered, that the British people were originally told that the EU would be a trading block only, and not a political union. He claimed that at the time of the UK entry and the later referendum, the British people were never offered the full truth about the pooling of sovereignty.

 

Thirdly, Mike talked about the financial aspects of EU membership. He claimed that the UK as the second highest financial contributor to the EU is not getting a fair deal. Mike said that the cost to the UK of EU membership is 40 million pounds a day, not including the cost of implementing its legislation. He went on to mention that the UK only receives back one in four of the pounds it pays to the EU. The zealous MEP also voiced interesting views on the EU structure itself. He argued that some member states are "financial black holes", are given many billions and are often unable to provide an accurate “audit trail” of spending when requested to do so.

 

Fourthly, the issues of immigration and ‘The Human Rights Act’ were inevitable talking points. After a poetic movement when Mike expressed his admiration for the Magna Carta, he highlighted his belief that the Human Rights Act should be removed from UK statute. His reasoning for doing so is that in its present form, it is far too specific and actually restricts our rights. He argued for a British Human Rights Act, which would take restrictions on the rights of the many but still uphold the rights of the few.

 

On the subject of immigration, Mike expressed his anger at the lack of clear-headed discussion on the issue and that this in turn could lead to the problem spiralling out of control. He outlined the problem of genuine asylum seekers being impersonated by economic migrants, and that this has created an air of distrust. He also claimed that this would be better dealt with by the UN on a world-wide basis. When questioned, he stated that the UN is the only body with authority to perform such a role. With the issue being an international one, a world-wide body rather than a continental one would need to intervene.

 

The talk was followed by an extended question and answer session. The discussion shifted to climate change. Firstly, Mike admitted that the issue was of importance and needed to be dealt with. However, in controversial fashion, Mike went on to say how he felt the issue of carbon emissions was concentrated on far too much! He claimed that with small businesses in England unable to cope with the restrictions heaped on by the EU to combat carbon emissions, many businesses naturally looked to set up elsewhere in the world solely because of such enforcement. A controversial view it can be said, particularly in a room containing more than a few Green Party supporters.

 

Mike gave out a lot of UKIP handouts at the end including campaign manifestos, DVDs outlining some of the EU’s shortcomings, and the campaign material for the previous EU election campaign.

 

It can be said that Mike's views on trade raised a few eyebrows in the room. I am sure that some of you reading now are probably experiencing a similar reaction. However, you could not doubt the MEP’s knowledge of UKIP policy and his statistical evidence.

 

From a personal perspective, I found that whatever people’s political opinions were, they respected Mike’s message and the honest and clear response given to questions. Although I was disappointed that others in the room did not think to mention the issue of the MEP expenses and the hot topic that is the Euro, I must admit that I also suffered a temporary memory lapse.

 

I would like to thank Marco for his assistance in inviting Mike to speak, the College for allowing us to use its resources, and the students who turned up to hear Mike’s message. Most of all, I must give a big thanks to Mike for an impressive talk on what is a passionately debated topic, and for travelling all the way from Brussels to speak to us.