That BBC Documentary

As a post script to our piece last week discussing the problems which the EU is currently facing, a number of people have drawn our attention to Katya Adler’s documentary “After Brexit: The battle for Europe“.

The BBC has been in the firing line of groups like the Campaign for an Independent Britain for a long time because of its pro-EU bias –  a bias which dates back to the years when our accession talks were still ongoing, so it was understandably quite a shock to watch the Corporation’s own Europe editor travelling round Europe in a documentary which openly acknowledged the challenges which the EU is facing  in the wake of the Brexit vote. Miss Adler called our departure just “one crisis among many” as far as the EU is concerned and certainly, if one takes the documentary at face value, she is correct.

The progamme features interviews with several euro-critical politicians of varying shades of opinion, including Beppe Grillo in Italy and Marine le Pen in France. Miss Adler also travelled to Hungary to interview  László Toroczkai, the controversial mayor of Ásotthalom, a town near the country’s border with Serbia, who has posted a controversial video warning migrants not to enter his town – totally in disregard of the EU’s fundamental principles, but very much in line with the stance of his Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán.

The prevailing picture painted by the documentary was of an EU caught in the crossfire of several different, albeit interlinked, opposition movements. In Italy, the €uro is the main gripe, whereas in France, an historic bastion of protectionism, globalists are being challenged by what Marine le Pen calls “Patriots”.  Hungary, along with its Visegrád friends, is proclaiming in no uncertain terms its opposition to immigration and multiculturalism.

Of course, Marine le Pen’s Front National is every bit as opposed to immigration – at least Moslem immigration – as Hungary’s leaders while Germany’s Alternative für Deutschland – whose Deputy Leader Beatrix von Storch was among those interviewed by Miss Adler – is as unhappy with the €uro as Beppe Grillo’s party in Italy.  Yet these interwoven strands do seem to have put the EU into something of a stranglehold. Miss Adler finds herself drawing a conclusion which would have been dismissed as poppycock ten years ago:- “Europe’s decision-makers face an unprecedented challenge. Our thorny national debate about Brexit could turn out to be irrelevant. Sooner or later the EU as we know it may no longer be there for us to leave.”

Not everyone agrees, Guy Verhofstadt, the ex-Belgian Prime Minister whom she interviewed in Brussels,  sounded very upbeat. He pointed to a rise in support for EU membership in, among other countries, Denmark following the Brexit vote. “A counter-revolution is under way” he said, while reiterating the classic Europhile mantra for solving Europe’s problems:- “We need to work for closer union.”  Federica Mogherini, the EU’s “High representative” for foreign affairs, also sounded very positive, calling the EU ” a miracle” and claiming that as an institution, it remains “indispensable”.

A more sober assessment was provided by Martin Schulz, the former President of the European Parliament. Although every inch as much a Europhile as Verhofstadt or Mogherini, he bluntly stated that “the risk that we  fall apart is very real.” This is a far more realistic assessment of the situation. Gone are the days when the EU project was regarded with admiration by other countries and continents. To quote Miss Adler again, “Few Europeans are happy with the Union the way it is now. The cry for change is deafening. As is the demand for less bossiness from Brussels. EU power-brokers have a choice: to sink or swim differently, and more in harmony with what the people of Europe want.”

This is the crux of the matter. The EU has been doggedly pursuing its building project of a single European state by means of “ever closer union”. The political problems of its currency union, the blatant violation of the Schengen agreement, a smouldering resentment of the power of the institutions in Brussels and growing hostility to its embrace of big multinationals and political correctness cannot be addressed by just carrying on with the same agenda – Mr Verhofstadt’s solution to the  problem. The question is whether it is possible to change direction quickly and radically enough to avoid being swamped by the rising tide of hostility to everything which Brussels represents.

We have reached the point where the EU’s usual “muddle through” approach to crises is no longer adequate. Furthermore, the recent utterances of people like Verhofstadt, Juncker and Mogherini do not suggest that the EU élite has the ability to “think out of the box” which is needed if the EU is to survive in anything like its present form. No doubt critics will read this piece and say that it is nothing more than wishful thinking by a long-standing anti-EU campaigner, but the harsh reality is that it is nothing more than a précis of a documentary fronted by the BBC’s Europe editor  which happens to agree with her assessment.

Photo by motiqua

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
John Petley

John Petley

John Petley is Operations Manager for Campaign for an Independent Britain

More Posts

4 comments

  1. John AshworthReply

    It was interesting when Fishing for Leave had a meeting on 17th. January 2017 with the Brexit Department, David Jones MP said the Fishermen’s demonstration on the Thames 15th. June 2016 was a major event that had an effect on the referendum outcome.

  2. Gordon WebsterReply

    I didn’t watch the BBC Documentary, but have read a lot about it. My view, is that the BBC haven’t suddenly found an honest bone in their body but, being Europhiles, this was the anguished cry of a lamb that’s lost its mother.
    As for Brussels, they are completely lost to explain what is happening throughout Europe. The Prime Reason for setting up the EU was a One Nation Europe, with One Government, One Central Bank, One Border, and One Army – the four pillars of Statehood. That is what Jean Monnet saw as happening by stealth – “the people will not accept this, so it must happen so that they do not notice.
    The backlash throughout Europe was bound to happen, as Brussels became more conceited and arrogant in their power. Flooding Europe with unemployed young men, when their is high unemployment throughout Europe, with the sole intention of destroying National Identities, thus making The EU the new National Identity was thoughtless and crass. France is on fire at the moment, as thousands of these uninvited guests riot. This must have been foreseen, as Le Bon describes the mechanism in his “Psychology or The Crowd,” and “Psychology of Revolution.” When the Ruling Elite become so insensitive to the suffering of the people, the seeds of revolution are sown.” “When the crowd/mob come together, they lose all rational thought, no matter how intelligent the individual, and are ripe for control by even an average orator.”
    The fire is lit.

    • John Petley
      John PetleyReply

      Gordon, If you click on the second hyperlink entitled “After Brexit the Battle for Europe, you can watch it at your leisure as the link takes you to a you tube version of the programme. I think you’ll find it a well-spent 55 minutes.

Leave a comment