EVERY PM AGAINST BREXIT
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
- → Every British Prime Minister from 1957 to 2016
𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗬 𝗔𝗟𝗟 𝗪𝗔𝗡𝗧𝗘𝗗 𝗕𝗥𝗜𝗧𝗔𝗜𝗡 𝗜𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗘𝗨𝗥𝗢𝗣𝗘𝗔𝗡 𝗖𝗢𝗠𝗠𝗨𝗡𝗜𝗧𝗬
From 1957 to 2016, EVERY Prime Minister wanted Britain IN the European Community.
How things have changed.
Since the 2016 referendum, every Prime Minister has wanted Britain OUT of the European Community.
And whoever becomes our next Prime Minister on 4 July - whether Rishi Sunak or the pollsters’ favourite, Keir Starmer - we’re promised another five years of Brexit.
Even though polls consistently show that’s not what the country wants.
Here are the ten consecutive Prime Ministers who all wanted our country to be a member of the European Community.
(Churchill is excluded because, although he supported the formation of a union of European countries, he didn't as PM think we should join, because we already had our Empire. His view changed when it became obvious in the late 1950s that our Empire was finished. See churchill.eu-ro...)
① 𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗢𝗟𝗗 𝗠𝗔𝗖𝗠𝗜𝗟𝗟𝗔𝗡 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟭𝟵𝟱𝟳 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟲𝟯
In 1961, Mr Macmillan applied for Britain to join the European Economic Community, just four years after it was formed.
② 𝗦𝗜𝗥 𝗔𝗟𝗘𝗖 𝗗𝗢𝗨𝗚𝗟𝗔𝗦-𝗛𝗢𝗠𝗘 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟭𝟵𝟲𝟯 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟲𝟰
③ 𝗘𝗗𝗪𝗔𝗥𝗗 𝗛𝗘𝗔𝗧𝗛 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟬 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟰
It was Edward Heath who successfully negotiated Britain’s membership of the European Community, after winning the 1970 general election on a manifesto promise to join, and following the backing of Parliament after 300 hours of debate on whether we should join.
④ 𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗢𝗟𝗗 𝗪𝗜𝗟𝗦𝗢𝗡 - 𝗟𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗥, 𝟭𝟵𝟲𝟰 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟬 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟰 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟲
In 1975 Harold Wilson offered the nation a referendum on whether to remain a member of the European Community. The ‘Yes’ vote won by a landslide - 67% to 33%.
⑤ 𝗝𝗔𝗠𝗘𝗦 𝗖𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗔𝗚𝗛𝗔𝗡 - 𝗟𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗥, 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟲 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟵
⑥ 𝗠𝗔𝗥𝗚𝗔𝗥𝗘𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗔𝗧𝗖𝗛𝗘𝗥 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟵 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟵𝟬
⑦ 𝗝𝗢𝗛𝗡 𝗠𝗔𝗝𝗢𝗥 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟭𝟵𝟵𝟬 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟵𝟳
⑧ 𝗧𝗢𝗡𝗬 𝗕𝗟𝗔𝗜𝗥 - 𝗟𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗥, 𝟭𝟵𝟵𝟳 𝘁𝗼 𝟮𝟬𝟬𝟳
⑨ 𝗚𝗢𝗥𝗗𝗢𝗡 𝗕𝗥𝗢𝗪𝗡 - 𝗟𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗥, 𝟮𝟬𝟬𝟳 𝘁𝗼 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟬
⑩ 𝗗𝗔𝗩𝗜𝗗 𝗖𝗔𝗠𝗘𝗥𝗢𝗡 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟬 𝗧𝗢 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟲
All these 10 Prime Ministers had good points and bad points. They also had different policies and certainly didn’t agree on everything.
But during their premierships, they all - without exception - agreed on one thing: that membership of the European Community was in Britain’s best interests.
Could they ALL have been wrong?
© Report and video production by @JonDanzig
#EU #Brexit #SingleMarket #generalelection
→ Every British Prime Minister from 1957 to 2016
𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗬 𝗔𝗟𝗟 𝗪𝗔𝗡𝗧𝗘𝗗 𝗕𝗥𝗜𝗧𝗔𝗜𝗡 𝗜𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗘𝗨𝗥𝗢𝗣𝗘𝗔𝗡 𝗖𝗢𝗠𝗠𝗨𝗡𝗜𝗧𝗬
From 1957 to 2016, EVERY Prime Minister wanted Britain IN the European Community.
How things have changed.
Since the 2016 referendum, every Prime Minister has wanted Britain OUT of the European Community.
And whoever becomes our next Prime Minister on 4 July - whether Rishi Sunak or the pollsters’ favourite, Keir Starmer - we’re promised another five years of Brexit.
Even though polls consistently show that’s not what the country wants.
Here are the ten consecutive Prime Ministers who all wanted our country to be a member of the European Community.
(Churchill is excluded because, although he supported the formation of a union of European countries, he didn't as PM think we should join, because we already had our Empire. His view changed when it became obvious in the late 1950s that our Empire was finished. See churchill.eu-rope.com/)
① 𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗢𝗟𝗗 𝗠𝗔𝗖𝗠𝗜𝗟𝗟𝗔𝗡 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟭𝟵𝟱𝟳 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟲𝟯
In 1961, Mr Macmillan applied for Britain to join the European Economic Community, just four years after it was formed.
② 𝗦𝗜𝗥 𝗔𝗟𝗘𝗖 𝗗𝗢𝗨𝗚𝗟𝗔𝗦-𝗛𝗢𝗠𝗘 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟭𝟵𝟲𝟯 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟲𝟰
③ 𝗘𝗗𝗪𝗔𝗥𝗗 𝗛𝗘𝗔𝗧𝗛 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟬 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟰
It was Edward Heath who successfully negotiated Britain’s membership of the European Community, after winning the 1970 general election on a manifesto promise to join, and following the backing of Parliament after 300 hours of debate on whether we should join.
④ 𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗢𝗟𝗗 𝗪𝗜𝗟𝗦𝗢𝗡 - 𝗟𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗥, 𝟭𝟵𝟲𝟰 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟬 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟰 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟲
In 1975 Harold Wilson offered the nation a referendum on whether to remain a member of the European Community. The ‘Yes’ vote won by a landslide - 67% to 33%.
⑤ 𝗝𝗔𝗠𝗘𝗦 𝗖𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗔𝗚𝗛𝗔𝗡 - 𝗟𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗥, 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟲 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟵
⑥ 𝗠𝗔𝗥𝗚𝗔𝗥𝗘𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗔𝗧𝗖𝗛𝗘𝗥 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟭𝟵𝟳𝟵 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟵𝟬
⑦ 𝗝𝗢𝗛𝗡 𝗠𝗔𝗝𝗢𝗥 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟭𝟵𝟵𝟬 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟵𝟵𝟳
⑧ 𝗧𝗢𝗡𝗬 𝗕𝗟𝗔𝗜𝗥 - 𝗟𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗥, 𝟭𝟵𝟵𝟳 𝘁𝗼 𝟮𝟬𝟬𝟳
⑨ 𝗚𝗢𝗥𝗗𝗢𝗡 𝗕𝗥𝗢𝗪𝗡 - 𝗟𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗥, 𝟮𝟬𝟬𝟳 𝘁𝗼 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟬
⑩ 𝗗𝗔𝗩𝗜𝗗 𝗖𝗔𝗠𝗘𝗥𝗢𝗡 - 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘, 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟬 𝗧𝗢 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟲
All these 10 Prime Ministers had good points and bad points. They also had different policies and certainly didn’t agree on everything.
But during their premierships, they all - without exception - agreed on one thing: that membership of the European Community was in Britain’s best interests.
Could they ALL have been wrong?
The empire should not have ended the way it did. I dont believe like majority of South Asians that the empire was bad for us, I believe it was good for us and I can jot down many reasons behind my argument. However I agree I am a minority voice.
Nevertheless, i think the best arrangement would have been a shared power structure in the sub-continent,shared between the Indian elected representatives and british crown nominated leadership. Most people of India did not have any option to elect their representatives until the late 20th century by which time the British had already decided to leave.
In present situation I think there would have been good chances of indians electing British leaders for official positions themselves and nothing could have made me more happy.
Here’s a list of Europeans wanting you fruitcakes out of the EU for good .
1. ALL 26 MEMBERS.
@@jcvastgoed1490 No, that's not true, and I cannot offer you a platform on my RUclips Channel to post statements that are completely unfounded. EU leaders have said we'd be welcome back and no EU member state has said we would not be welcome back.
And incidentally, there are 27 members of the EU, not 26.
You will have to use your own RUclips channel for your agenda, you cannot use mine. Bye.
@@JonDanzig France and many other do. You dumb tea drinking fruitcake . Another great reason to not let you back in .
@@ABO-Destiny I'm with Jon in that I don't agree your position on this. If my history classes can be relied on, the British hadn't already decided to leave but they were 'shown the door' by a passive revolt and absolute non-compliance. What was left were Muslim and Hindu leaders squabbling over the power vacuum left once the British were gone. As I say, I'm not an expert on Anglo-Indian relations but that's what I was taught growing up. Appointed British leaders would nee, could never be a good thing for the sub-continent - India was ready to stand up for herself. ❤
A great video. Thanks to Jon for his tireless work.
The people of the UK must wake up!
As they come from both Labour and Conservative, it shows that both parties were pro-EU until fairly recently.
Compare and contrast the gravitas and acumen of British Prime Ministers in the 60 years from 1957 with what’s on offer today in the United Kingdom.
Of course, some of those past Prime Ministers shone brighter than others.
Of course, not all their polices were correct.
Of course, all of them made some mistakes of varying degrees (the last of them, Cameron, the biggest mistake of all).
But they all uniformly and unanimously agreed with one key policy and principle: that being IN the European Community was in the very best interests of Britain.
Today’s leaders are not interested in the combined wisdom of the ten past British Prime Ministers who all understood and endorsed Britain’s place in Europe.
But we, the people, should not forget. The message of bygone leaders beckons us now.
Our future, our security, our prosperity all depends on Britain getting back with our friends and allies in the European Community.
What's on offer today is a bunch of self-serving chancers and opportunistic charlatans!
I have always believed that we are better off inside the European Union.
Where you can meet regularly to discuss the issues that matter.
I am not saying that the EU is perfect, not by any stretch of the imagination but I do believe that the UK as a nation has far much more to gain by being part of this community than we do on the outside for the reasons stipulated by the likes of Ken Clarke, Sir John Major, Sir Tony Blair, Lord Heseltine, Gordon Brown and Chris Bryant.
Brilliant. It begs the question, why on earth did David Cameron even call such a referendum, and then not put in place safe guards? imo that is one of the worst judgements displayed by any UK PM, perhaps even worse than Suez. In one moment he has risked all the work of previous decades.
The answer to that Mike is simple: Cameron was threatened by the head bangers within his own party! Their requirements were simple: 'We want to leave Europe. You either call a referendum or we will find another leader who will.' (We: The privileged, super-rich and other persons making massive contributions to the Conservative Party). He also had the pain that was UKIP and it's unremarkable leader Nigel Farage - he threatened to take votes away from the Conservatives. Cameron was caught between a rock and a hard place. To be fair to him, he said repeatedly that leaving would be a bad move and would resign if the referendum came out in favour of leaving. What Cameron should have done is tell all the head bangers to STFU, get back in line or get out of the party! A little back bone would have suited him better. 😔
Easy
The EU was planing to create an agency dedicated to fight money laundering. The EU wanted to implement much tougher laws on tax evasion and offshore bank accounts.
And suddenly Brexsh*t started appearing.
Make your own conclusions...
@@AxGerm756 Of all the ideas out there, I have always thought this one to be the more likely! 👏🏾🫶🏾
The only thing I keep coming to is a radio interview with Blair where he told a caller that there would definitely be a vote put to the public about JOINING the EU , when Parliament had assessed the worthiness of the legal framework.
Whilst knowing at the same time we had been in the EU since the Heath Common Market vote.
The EU and the EEC are exactly the same organisation, with the same foundational goals as enshrined in the 1957 Treaty of Rome. There really is no difference.
EEC member states unanimously and democratically agreed to change the organisation's name to European Union in the Maastricht Treaty that was signed in 1992, some five years before Blair came to power. So how could he possibly promise a vote about joining the EU when we were already a member?
Do you have a link to the radio interview?
Instead, the British people preferred to follow Farage… 🤷♀️
Farage is a weathervane, not a signpost.
@@Lucid.dreamerLeave yourself then. No one is forcing you to stay, afterall the Berlin Wall came down in the late 80s and as far as I am aware the EU has very open borders within it, and your passport should take you to most countries in the world. If you believe there is some wonderful, sunlit upland and Utopia elsewhere in the world that would make you happier, then go. Sadly too many numpties in Britain who voted Leave on the back of lies, from self serving Tories in the main. Fortunately more and more people are regretting their decision in 2016, and for subsequently voting in the Incompetents who never believed in the project and didn't have a clue what they were doing! I wouldn't recommend the UK at the moment 😊
Says it all really- what a terrible blunder Brexit has been.
@@Lucid.dreamer Kept you prisoner did they?
Farage would let putler roll right in to the uk
Think on…
thank you for your work, i will save this video
I don't think Cameron belongs on this list, despite what he said as leader of the Tories' alleged 'Remain campaign'. There is video evidence from 2010 that suggests he was more of a Eurosceptic than a Remainer. His last attempt to 'negotiate' with the EU was either ridiculously naive or intended to court rejection, as any politician worth their salt should have known that freedom of movement, being one of the 'four pillars' of the EU is non-negotiable. And he resigned, when, if he had stayed in office, Parliament would have been free to properly discuss the referendum outcome, without he ERC being at liberty to steal it from under their noses. It's all very fishy and suggests that forcing through Brexit was a Conservative plot from day one
I agree he was a difficult contender for the list, but it is also a fact that he pushed hard for Britain to remain a member of the EU, so it is historically accurate to claim that he was one of the ten British Prime Ministers who supported our membership.
Unfortunately, Cameron put party before country.
1:32 A community! Hence the C in EEC! Sadly that political aspect was forgotten by many afterwards.
Amazing
Britain cannot remain safe and prosperous by remaining isolated from europe with which it shares a common and ancient history.
Moreover, i feel Britain is still in an unique position to be a gateway, the umbilical cord, the guide between Europe and rest of the world. I strongly believe in this and this was proved during the continents colonial phase and post colonial phase too.
The only other country which could have possibly played that role of Britain was Italy and it did turn out that way somewhat with the Roman Catholic church remaining the flag bearer of Christian europe worldwide.
It is important that Britain remains connected to Europe much more closely than it does with any other part of the world.
But remember no role goes abegging. If Britain is unwilling to fill up that responsibility I am sure it will be taken up by some other group in future.
SOMEONE COMMENTED: It would help if you differentiated between the EEC and the EU. They are very different things. Joining the EEC was sold as joining a trading block..
MY REPLY: The EU and the EEC are exactly the same organisation, with the same foundational goals as enshrined in the 1957 Treaty of Rome. There really is no difference, and so no reason to attempt to differentiate.
The EEC was NEVER just a trading bloc, as my video of the different Prime Ministers should make clear, as trade was not the main reasons that these PMs supported membership, right from 1957.
The EEC started first and foremost as a political union of European countries with the express aim of achieving peace and security between member states following the most devastating world wars. I explain this in my other video at whyeu.jondanzig.com
Even in the 1960s, there were advanced plans for monetary union (single currency) that Ted Heath referred to in Parliament at the time. When first applying to join in 1961, Prime Minister Harold Macmillan explained to the British people that joining would involve sharing of some sovereignty. That went way beyond just a trading bloc.
It's hard to understand how anyone could watch today's video of Prime Ministers and say the EEC was just about trade! They certainly didn't think so or say so.
My late mother-in-law was Polish and bravely fought the Nazis in the Polish resistance. She came to Ireland and then England when the Russians made it impossible for members of the Polish Resistance to return to their home country after the war. She once told me that the EEC/EU was the best thing to happen to Europe as it made sure that a war would ever again be fought between any of its mamber states. Dziękuję Ci za mądre słowa mamo!
They said it all. Then along came a very few who did not want to stop avoiding tax and keep on laundering money. They backed an ambitious clown and a free loader.
Your wrong about thatcher she wrote a book specifically stating that the uk needs to leave the eu as Brussels had become corrupt to the core so thatcher may have been for the eu but she later came to detest what it became and openly wrote she wanted the uk to leave
AND THEN A DAVID CAMERON CAME ALONG ! INEXPERIENCED; OVERESTIMATING HIMSELF; GAMBELD AND LOST EVERYTHING !
1:02 is the most impressive.
Ma ,I politici di oggi non sono affatto inderesseati Al bene del paese ,loro sono inderessati a come aumemtare il proprio conto in banga . Questa e la politica di oggi'''
English exceptionalism,,,,Scotland Wales NI VOTED to remain.
👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
US ? UK
I agree that's confusing so have amended, thanks.
Share on X:
x.com/Jon_Danzig/status/1806646554154991677
Why did they all want the uk in the union?
Because they all understood and appreciated that Britain is safer, stronger and more prosperous being part of the world's biggest political trading bloc.
My video explains further at whyeu.jondanzig.com
Because as one of the big three standing shoulder-to-shoulder with France and Germany, the UK was respected and loved as a parnter with the gravitas to make the EU a major force for good in the world.
@@iankuah8606 They only liked the fact that the imagrants were in transit through their country heading for England.
@@michaelc821 Your comment doesn't really make sense.
@@JonDanzig look at the current imagrant boat crisis from France, why don't they stay in the European Market where they were before? Considering France was paid millions to deal with their own imagrants.
Every PM since 2016 is now a brexitier and the next one looks like he’s joining that club.
Not so. The fact is at present we are unable to rejoin the EU, because the other members would not allow us to. The best estimate is that, _after_ the EU has decided to let us rejoin, the process would take at least ten years.
The best that can be done in the meantime is to mitigate the damage and prepare the way for accession talks. The most important thing is to ensure that there is no possibility of a future tory or any other party's government sabotaging that process by blocking consensus amongst the British people. To that end Starmer's strategy is well thought out, but requires time. It is not one party that can do this. It requires a national consensus, a groundswell of public opinion that will not be stymied by those who seek personal gain by standing against it.
@@bobjohnbowles No other EU member state has said we would not be allowed to join, although of course all member states must unanimously agree to accept our membership. I agree the process will take years, but the sooner we start, the sooner we might get back.
@@bobjohnbowles I completely agree. - It's the only common sense comment I've read in years.
@@bobjohnbowles for me it's not the case that other EU members would not allow the UK to join again. The UK doesn't satisfy half the Copenhagen criteria. If we did satisfy those criteria we could ask the question.
Of course there is more to it than that. Including the damage that's been caused to relationships and trust, by the fact of leaving and in the horrible behaviour of British politicians in the process.
Starmer is a pragmatic politician who isn't about to risk everything by saying he will draw up a plan that would eventually result in the UK being able to apply to join the EU. The British public as a whole is not ready to sign up to such a plan.
To me it's clear what direction we need to go but it's going to take a long time. The vast majority need to be on board, and for the right reasons. Brexit failing, on its own, is not a good enough reason.