What we have to remember is that all the founding fathers of the EU were roman catholics and they got their instructions from Rome and the Bilderberg group.
EU is the new Roman Empire. The 12 stars of the Eu flag symbolizes virgin mary who is a particular catholic godess.
What is your prime minister Tony Blair really doing ?, hes is ushering in the [resurrection of that] ‘Holy’ Roman Empire. The real aim of the European Union is a United Roman Catholic States of Europe, which was the ideal pursued by Pius XII through his Concordat with Adolf Hitler. In a remarkable speech given in French in 1975, Pope Paul VI said that it was “the [Roman] Catholic faith that made Europe” and added: “No other human force in Europe can render the service that is confided to us, promoters of the faith, to awaken the Christian soul of Europe, where its unity is rooted.” [Reported in The Reformer, January/February, 1976. Note that it is a "human" force, not one of God.]

It is the Papacy that is behind the drive for European unity. The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588?1679) once remarked: “The Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman Empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof.” [Leviathan, Part 4, Chapter 47 (1651).] The Microsoft Encarta Encyclopaedia 99 article on the Roman Empire states:

Atleast there is a tiny tiny risk that this is true.

In the meantime, I dismantled that ludicrous article at length on my own blog a couple of days ago. It might interest you.

David - I agree. The culture is too deeply embedded, I fear. We thought - or perhaps “hoped” is the better word - the mass resignation of all the Commissioners in 1999 was an opportunity for a new start but that was not to be.

As mentioned above, the National Audit Office report on the refusal of the European Court of Auditors to endorse EU Community accounts for the eighth year in succession was published on the morning of 12 June. I can confirm that as I found and downloaded the report that morning.

Recall what also happened that same day? It was the day of the notorious botched cabinet reshuffle when Tony Blair decided to abolish the office of Lord Chancellor without recourse to the seemingly unnecessary burden of putting any instrumental legislation through Parliament first. As could have been foreseen, the British media became preoccupied with kerfuffle over the cabinet reshuffle and mostly failed to notice the NAO report on the EU accounts. Besides, it was about those European institutions which Brits don’t have much regard for anyway - judging by those Eurobarometer polls. But it is European taxpayers’ money that the EU Commission is failing to account for - and for the eighth year in succession.

Personally, I’d be much more impressed if Tony Blair and Jack Straw made some effort to press for an end to corruption in the EU Commission instead of just slagging off the Tories whenever they make speeches about Britain’s relationship with the EU. The recurring scale of corruption in the EU Commission ought to be unacceptable. And administrative reform in the EU Commission is the portfolio of EU Commissioner Kinnock, whom Tony Blair himself nominated to be one of Britain’s Commissioners.

Of course, the coincidence of the NAO report and the cabinet reshuffle on the same day was just accidental. Or was it? What would likely public reaction be to a public utilities company, with a revenue of E100 billion, if the company’s auditors refused to endorse its accounts for eight years in succession?

Iain - I’ve no “Road Map”, especially since I’ve not been in Commission buildings in Brussels since the early 1980s. However, I’ve talked with work colleagues who have done stints there since and the impression I gained from them is not encouraging.

The one thing I feel convinced about is the crucial importance of not denying that there is an endemic problem when there plainly is. Open debate is the best possible antidote to political corruption and it has to be said that there is a recognizable kind of Europhile, in my personal experience, who regards any criticism of the EU and its institutions and policies as akin to “blasphemy” so rational, constructive discussion becomes impossible. What is worse, I sometimes get the feeling that the blasphemy angle and its like may be a contrived defensive spin against any change in the status quo.

Rather than discuss fundamentals, EU critics are dubbed xenophobic Europhobes. A recent speech by Jack Straw, Britain’s foreign secretary, purportedly about the benefits for Britain from joining the Euro, was almost entirely focused on painting the Conservatives as Eurobigots who want to get Britain out of the EU - curious that, when Tony Blair was first elected to Parliament in 1983 on a manifesto that would have committed an incoming Labour government then to negotiate withdrawal and without a referendum on the terms. Presumably, had Labour won that 1983 election, we wouldn’t be having this discussion here now.

Have a look at the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) of Transparency International at: http://www.transparency.org/pressreleases_archive/2002/2002.08.28.cpi.en.html What comes out of that is in Europe the Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands, Britain and Germany are perceived as countries where corruption is relatively low. There are distinctive differences between the political cultures of EU member states. Above, I mentioned the Eurobarometer polls on how EU citizens rate the value of EU membership in which respondents in Britain regularly come out at or near the bottom. It seems to me beyond coincidence that Italy and Belgium regularly feature around the top of the same Eurobarometer polls on enthusiasm for the EU but rate relatively low in Europe on the CPI. Besides that, I’ve a personal archive (backed up) of media reports on the web relating to corruption scandals in EU member state governments. The archive is depressingly large. I’ve lost count of how many writs Berlusconi has by now issued against The Economist for its analysis of the political scene in Italy. As for Belgium, is there any prospect of Detroux being actually brought to trial for the heinous crimes he is accused of and detained for?

Supposedly, administrative reforms of the EU Commission were and are being addressed. Let’s recap a little: All the EU Commissioners resigned in March 1999 following an adverse report of an expert panel on maladministration, nepotism and fraud in the EU Commission. A new Commission was appointed by member state governments with Prodi as president and Kinnock as vice-president with a porfolio for administrative reform in the EU Commission. Judging by the emerging Eurostat scandal - reportedly running to millions of Euros of Commission funds diverted to private accounts - and the decision of the European Court of Auditors not to endorse Commission accounts for the eighth year in succession, little apparent progress on administrative reform seems to have been made in the four years of the new Commission. For a start, perhaps the European Parliament might set up its own inquiry as to why.