Speaking in the European Parliament, Strasbourg today in the presence of Jean Claude Juncker, UKIP MEP Nigel Farage wished participants of a debate about forthcoming European Council a Merry Christmas, saying that Brexit brought three great gifts for all.
The three gifts he pinpointed were the Brexit vote, the Trump triumph and the Italian rebellion. He said that believers in nation state democracy are looking forward to an exciting New Year when the democratic revolution will continue.
Responding to Brussels demands for an EU army, Farage said this, not a Trump victory would be a threat to NATO.
In response to a question from MEP Sophie in 't Veld, he called for politicised British judges to stand down from any Brexit court cases.
You can read the speech in full below as well as his response to Sophie in 't Veld MEP:
Well I think we can all agree that 2017 has been a momentous, indeed historic year, and as it is Christmas let’s think of these events in terms of the three wise men bearing their gifts.
First we have the Brexit deliverance, then we had the Trump triumph and then thirdly of course the Italian rebellion, it is just in this case the gifts were all the same.
Democracy and the rebirth of the nation state and I really think you better listen because I know in the past you have managed to ignore Danish, Dutch, Irish and French referendums but this time it is for real. A democratic revolution has begun and yet when the 28 leaders of the EU countries meet tomorrow, on the agenda I see no sign of humility, I see no understanding of what has happened at all, in fact what I see is the implementation plan of the EU global strategy on security and defence, in simple English EU militarisation. The building of a European army and indeed Mr Juncker used Donald Trump’s magnificent victory to say well that means that NATO won’t be here anymore, we have to do this ourselves is what you said, and I think this is a huge and dangerous error.
Trump is not a threat to NATO, he wants it to be redefined and he wants the members to pay their way. It is Mr Juncker who is a threat to NATO. You can pretend today if you like that your military structure is going to run parallel with NATO but those two structures cannot run together without being in direct conflict with each other. It was Tony Blair who first really worried me about this project when he said the rational for the EU today is not peace it is about power, and we have already seen that power exercised in terms of foreign policy in the Ukraine where we have wantingly provoked Russia and we actually got rid of a democratically elected leader.
You know history is littered with conflicts caused by empires that seek to expand. And it’s about time the British Government stood up tomorrow and said: enough, this is madness and we, as an independent United Kingdom, will act as the bridge between America and the nation states of Europe to make sure NATO is secure.
I also hope tomorrow that we see the British Prime Minister stop dithering on Brexit, it’s been six months since we voted for our liberation, and at the minute we’re being dictated to by courts, and European commissioners, and told what we can and cannot do. I hope we do that, but I suspect we won't, and I suspect the other 27 leaders will continue on the same course, and that’s why you can all look forward to some even bigger dramatic shocks coming in 2017, it’s going to be, for nation state democrats, a very happy new year.
Response to question:
Well Tony Blair has done his absolute best to politicise the civil service that had been made neutral by Gladstone 140 years earlier, and yes of course it’s true. Some people, who are sitting in judgement have actively been engaged in the process of European unity, and they, in those specific cases should, I think, have absented themselves. The real point I’m making is dithering. Had the new prime minister triggered Article 50 immediately there would be no court cases, you wouldn't have Monsieur Barnier talking down to us. We’d be getting on with doing the best we can under article 50. Though I’m concerned, that listening to your colleague, Mr Verhofstadt, that once we trigger article 50, it may become so unworkable that we simply have to say: we’re going, good bye.