- The Daily Telegraph: EU accused of 'hijacking' Remembrance Sunday
The story was so clearly nonsensical that even The Daily Express didn't bother copying it for its edition the next day. The Telegraph claimed that:
"The EU has been accused of trying to "hijack" Remembrance Sunday with a £4.7 million plan to put euro-branded commemorative plaques marking "European integration" on war cemeteries and memorials."
This refers to proposed piece of European legislation (full text available here) which provides for an EU-wide heritage label that could be used to
"Enhance the value and profile of sites which have played a key role in the history and the building of the European Union."
The scheme builds on a previous purely intergovernmental project of a similar nature, launched in 2006, in which 17 EU member states plus Switzerland participate. A total of 64 sites have been awarded the label so far, including the Acropolis in Athens, the shipyards of Gdansk and Cluny Abbey. The European Commission was explicitly invited by the Council of Ministers in November 2008 to come up with a proposal for an EU-wide version of the label.
The claim that the latest proposed legislation will lead to EU flags being foisted upon British war cemeteries and memorials seems to have originated with a quote by a European Commission official, which mentioned that
The claim that the latest proposed legislation will lead to EU flags being foisted upon British war cemeteries and memorials seems to have originated with a quote by a European Commission official, which mentioned that
"Places of remembrance clearly have their place in European history, not only as memorials to those who lost their lives but also as places where visitors can reflect on how and why Europe has successfully avoided major conflicts for more than 65 years."The fact that war memorials could qualify for the European heritage label clearly does not mean that the EU will unilaterally decide to plaster them over war graves. In fact, the voluntary nature of the scheme is emphasised throughout the proposal. Article 4 explicitly states:
"The action shall be open to the participation of the Member States of the European Union. This participation shall be on a voluntary basis."
The proposed procedure for granting a European heritage label to a site of interest also involves an application to an independent EU-wide panel of twelve cultural experts, with pre-selection of the proposals being carried out by each individual Member State. Naturally, that means that only sites the host country thinks should have the European heritage label applied will be eligible for inclusion.
The European Commission sent a letter to The Telegraph pointing out this fairly obvious fact:
"If the panel receives no nominations from the UK, no sites in the UK would display the European Heritage Label. The EU cannot unilaterally impose the heritage label on anyone."
To summarise - participation is voluntary, sites have to be proposed and are not chosen by the EU and each Member State retains a veto over the label being awarded to a site within its national territory. To suggest the EU has already drawn up a list of UK 'targets' is plainly ridiculous, and only serves to emphasise the point that UKIP MEP Paul Nuttall, who is quoted in the article as saying that the EU wants to "impose its views on war sites such as the Menin Gate", clearly did not bother to read the proposal before voting against it.
The article's author, Bruno Waterfield, also references the cost of the project - arriving at the figure of £4.7 million for a period of six years, although the proposal itself earmarks some €2 million (£1.7 million) for a period of three years. Perhaps he called Open Europe or The Taxpayers' Alliance for a calculation?
---------------
Update: When the Member States formally adopted the proposal in July 2011, the UK was the only EU country to abstain from voting. The other 26 Member States voted to approve of the Heritage Label scheme.
