Oh look the unelected EU Commission now claims your money as its own.

Graham Charles Lear
4 min readJun 28, 2019


Sovereignty and democracy are dying by a thousand cuts — here’s an example

Yesterday the EU Commission announced a further €110 million in aid to the Horn of Africa. This money came from the taxpayers of the United Kingdom and the EU27 countries. It comes on top of the foreign aid which the UK gives directly to needy countries.

I have one question?

Why did the unelected EU Commission take credit for spending the UK’s taxpayer money?

I invite readers to study the above photo, taken in Ethiopia. This was the main photo used to promote the press release yesterday. Four Ethiopian women were given EU Commission balloons to hold. None of them appear to be particularly enthusiastic about this.

The wording on the balloons is :


Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection”

Readers will note that the promotional balloons do not refer to the European Union, but to the European Commission. The EU Commission (as I more accurately describe it) is an all-powerful, unelected body of civil servants. It is supposed to manage the money paid by the peoples of the EU, not to claim it as its own.

As a comparison, imagine if UK international aid to needy countries was accompanied by promotional balloons saying “UK Civil Service”?

Below is an example of how UK international aid is normally badged.

Who is responsible for this “EU Commission” aid?

EU Commissioner Christos Stylianides is responsible for ‘Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Management’. He comes from the small island of Cyprus in the Mediterranean.

While the news of the humanitarian aid to the Horn of Africa was being announced in Brussels yesterday, EU Commissioner Stylianides was in Berlin, for what he describes as a party.

And no, I can’t explain why these German civilian aid workers are dressed in military-style uniforms.

The UK is the second most generous country in the world, after the USA

The EU is fond of describing itself as the biggest donor of international aid in the world. It isn’t. The most generous is the USA, followed by the UK. The EU is not yet a country, despite its ambitions to be a superstate. Nevertheless, it constantly aggregates the international aid given by its 28 member countries and describes itself as the №1 donor in the world.

Technically, in 2017 Germany overtook the UK as the second-largest donor of international aid. However as I showed in an article I published last year, Germany has included billions which it is having to spend at home, dealing with its mass immigration of migrants caused by Angela Merkel’s unilateral open doors policy in 2015.

Like all normal people, I do not consider domestic expenditure to be international aid. It is time that the OECD (which reports on these matters) excluded domestic expenditure from its definition.

The slow death of democracy and sovereignty by a thousand cuts

Some readers may feel that the news from the EU Commission yesterday is not that important. After all, it relates to expenditure of only €110 million euros. I would just make two points.

Firstly, the payments announced yesterday come on top of a steady stream of expenditures by the EU. As the Commission said yesterday.

“Since 2018, the EU has provided humanitarian assistance in the Horn of Africa totaling €316.5 million.” (EU Commission, 27 Jun 2019)

Secondly, the EU federalists have always proceeded step-by-step in their inexorable march towards a technocrat-led superstate. As EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker famously admitted.

“We decide on something, leave it lying around, and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don’t understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back.”

I suggest that the EU Commission’s self-publicity for the latest aid to the Horn of Africa provides yet one more indication in a very long line of proofs of where the EU ‘Projekt’ is heading.

It’s time to pop their balloons.



Graham Charles Lear

What is life without a little controversy in it? Quite boring and sterile would be my answer.