More on Ganley

The Sunday Tribune has revealed that Declan Ganley 'would support a new European constitution "that is built on democracy, is legible and runs to no more than 20 or 25 pages that everyone can read." '. While he has avoided all reference to this in the announcement about Libertas acting as a party, given that it is essentially a one man show, his opinions are paramount. How can he have a party campaigning against the EU constitution, when he himself supports a 'different' EU constitution? He's not even against the concept of a constitution... and hence not against the formation of an EU superstate.

So what would Libertas MEPs be doing for their five year term? We have no idea. Like so many pressure groups, their arguments fall under even the most rudimentary examination. We could be voting for communists, fascists, or even former Labour party members. What agenda will they be pursuing?

Presumably the only thing that they will agree on is Ganley's support for a short new EU constitition. Which raises yet another question - who is going to vote for a party that has no policies other than to create a really short constitution for the EU?

What is baffling is that in the same article he accuses Sarkozy of breathtaking arrogance, and in the Telegraph claimed that "It's not just undemocratic, it's anti-democratic," in relation to Britain's signing of the treaty. It's as if he is a newcomer to the world of euroscepticism and is only just at the beginning of his journey; he still naively thinks that the EU is reformable.

His 'simple message' further unravels. The Tribune brifely tags in this at the end in reference to his support of the mini constitution: 'As a devout Roman Catholic would he insist on the inclusion of a reference to Europe's Christian roots'. As soon as you include one religion, you alienate all of the others, and the majority of rational people who think that you are mentally impaired for believing in ancient ritualistic hokum anyway.