•
This all makes good sense:
As the turmoil worsens in the financial markets the European Union is proving utterly incapable of handling the
crisis. Far from rescuing the economies of its member states the EU itself is starting to buckle under pressure.
The great American free-market economist Milton Friedman long maintained that the EU’s monetary union would not survive a serious recession – or “the first bump in the road”, as he put it. His prediction is looking all too accurate as the European banking system teeters on the edge of meltdown.
The looming catastrophe exposes the folly and deceit of all the enthusiasts for the EU who argued that the sacrifice of national sovereignty was a small price to pay in return for dynamic growth. Now the EU member states who signed up to the euro are experiencing the worst of all worlds.
Not only have they lost their national independence but they are also experiencing the start of the worst slump since the Second World War. The currency they adopted is chronically weak, the union they joined is imploding. The EU’s aggressive destruction of the nation state has been in vain.
Precisely because it takes no account of differences in national economies, the institution of European monetary union has proved hopelessly ill-equipped for the present crisis.
They decided to have the currency first and then build the nation. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work. You’ve got to have a nation first and then you can build a currency. They thought that political will could overcome the economics of the matter.
But the truth is that while you can ignore economics, economics ain’t gonna ignore you.
•
This is a little odd.
The Daily Mail revealed the scheme to deliver 60 per cent of post after midday in August last year.
Bizarrely, Royal Mail tried to pin the blame for the later deliveries on an EU directive which limits the speed large lorries, including those carrying post, can travel.
It said the slowing of its lorries had meant moving back delivery times for all.
In reality, they are part of a wider cost- cutting exercise that will slash the workforce by 40,000 and reduce overtime payments.
Now we do know that the Royal Mail is constrained by EU rules….that we’re not allowed to subsidise rural post offices as we might like for social reasons because we’re not allowed to subsidise companies in a competitive market above a certain level. And, yes, the PO faces such competition because of the EU.
But it’s really rather odd to find them telling such a story about the lorries but refusing to tell the story about the PO closures.
•
Brian Cowen, Ireland’s Prime Minister, must explain to a summit of Europe’s leaders next Wednesday how he is planning to resuscitate the EU Treaty, which was rejected by Irish voters in June.
While the final decision will be taken in December, Mr Cowen will hear demands from France and Germany that a second referendum take place as early as March 2009, before European elections.
I’m intending to be there myself, assuming my passport holds out.
It’s something of a pity that as always, no only means no until the next time you’re asked the same question, while yes means yes forever?
•
Bob Spink asks a question.
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate he has made of the average time per year spent by a household in sorting and recycling rubbish.
The answer?
No such estimate has been made.
The implications of this are in this old piece of mine.
Now think this through for a moment. What is the ultimate non-renewable resource? The one thing we can never recycle?
Yes, of course, it is our time. Once it’s gone it’s gone. So we have a system whereby we are not measuring our use of irreplacable resources in recycling our resources.
There’s something seriously wrong with this system, isn’t there?
And where does it come from? Yes, you’ve guessed it, the EU.
•
How did we get here?
A gardener who fenced off his allotment with barbed wire after being targeted by thieves has been ordered to take it down – in case intruders scratch themselves.
No, seriously, how did we end up being ruled by these sorts of people?
•
This pleases me no end, seeing letters like this is the regional press.
Dear Editor, According to Neena Gill MEP (Post, Oct 4): “The UK exports more to Holland than it does to the entire Commonwealth”. That’s like me saying all my post goes to the Royal Mail.
Such statements made by those who desperately try to defend the indefensible, try to deceive people into thinking that there are benefits to membership of the EU – which there are not. The Dutch ports of Rotterdam and Amsterdam are like vast Royal Mail sorting offices. Container ships go there, their loads are then sorted and put onto other ships which are then dispatched to all points on the globe. By using the above sweeping comments Neena Gill can make such claims, even though the final destinations are to places where we do most of our trade such as the USA.
In fact, when you look at British trade in total, of the 100 per cent of trade 80 per cent is internal, which includes you buying your Birmingham Post at the corner shop. Of the 20 per cent that is left for exports, around 60 per cent is claimed to be to the EU and the other 40 per cent to non-EU nations, but that does not take into account the above Amsterdam and Rotterdam effect. Although there are no accurate figures for this effect, it probably reverses the figures to around 40 per cent of trade to the EU.
The end result of this is that we are being asked to sacrifice 100 per cent of our sovereignty to the EU in return for around 10 per cent of total trade. It seems a pretty poor deal to me.
Derek Bennett,
Regional Liaison Officer,
UK Independence Party.
•
Yes, after they took the flag and the anthem out of the Constitution so they could call it the Lisbon Treaty they’ve gone ahead and voted them back in again anyway.
Beethoven’s Ode to Joy, the final movement of his choral ninth symphony, will be used to open the parliament after each election and for formal sittings where heads of state are present.
The blue flag with 12 gold stars will be flown on all parliament buildings and displayed in parliament meeting rooms and official events.
This particular version of the anthem will not be to manys’ taste. A little too much emphasis on bodily functions perhaps.
But appropriate somehow.
•
It’s not enough of course that we’ve those people over the water making 80% of our laws for us. We also have our own home grown bureaucrats gold plating them.
A market trader was convicted yesterday of selling fruit and vegetables using imperial measures – even though the EU says it should not be an offence.
Metric martyr Janet Devers, 64, said she had been made a ’scapegoat’ after being sentenced for selling goods on her market stall in pounds rather than kilos.
The mother of two fought back tears as she was ordered by magistrates to pay almost £5,000 in costs and told she would have a criminal record after being found guilty of eight offences under the Weights and Measures Act.
….
In September last year, Gunther Verheugen, European Commission vice president for enterprise and industry, said Brussels never intended to criminalise those who sold in pounds and ounces.
But the laws under which Mrs Devers was prosecuted are still on the UK statute books.
Just a few days after Mr Verheugen made his remarks trading standards officials from Hackney Council, supported by two police officers, arrived at Mrs Devers’s market stall to confiscate two sets of imperial, non-metric scales.
We’ve also got the most appalling bunch of…..well, no, better not use those sorts of words…..who have the gall to actually try and enforce these stupidities.
Anyone wanting to contribute to Mrs Devers’s costs can send donations to the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund, PO Box 526, Sunderland, SR1 3YS.
If current events have left anyone with any money at all that might be an idea, eh?
•
Sensible words from Bob Spink here.
A SOUTH Essex MP has labelled a proposed ban on parents smacking their children as “political correctness overriding common sense”.
Bob Spink, UKIP MP for Castle Point, spoke out after a cross-party group put forward changes to a Gover-nment Bill which would remove the rights of parents to carry out reasonable punishment.
Mr Spink dismissed calls for a law change and insisted parents should be allowed to discipline their children.
He added: “I think it is political correctness overriding common sense.
“Of course, parents shouldn’t abuse their children physically, or in any other way, but this is an inappropriate measure to be taking.
“There are many more important things which should be discussed in the House of Commons.
“Parents should be able to discipline their children. Evidence shows children who are disciplined in a caring way are more socially responsible.”
There has to be some method of dealing with the ankle biters, doesn’t there?
I have to admit though that this rather amused me.
NSPCC head of policy and public affairs Diana Sutton backed the call to stop parents smacking their children.
She said: “Smacking children is outdated and doesn’t work.
“It’s no longer an acceptable means of discipline.
“It is a national embarrassment. The UK is one of only five remaining EU countries not to have banned, or committed themselves to banning, the physical punishment of children.
As we all know, the reason for the invention of the EU was to stop Germany invading France. Again.
Quite how tapping little Timmy on the tushy might cause the Wermacht to holiday in Paris once again escapes me. So why bring up the EU at all.
Further.
Public opinion has turned against smacking.
Good oh. So if people aren’t doing it because they oppose it then we don’t need to make it illegal, do we?
•
That’s the way the European Parliament operates.
A written declaration is like an Early Day Motion at Westminster. Not going to become law but gets an issue aired. It’s entirely common for posters to be put up advertising one inside the Parliament, flyers to be handed out, all that sort of thing.
Except, if your declaration is something that the Parliament authorities don’t like, oooh, say, getting rid of the monthly move to Strasbourg, then they ban you from putting up such posters.
Dear President Pöttering,
with astonishment I have received the email from Mr. Rizzico you will find below .
After consulting Mr. Rizzico, he informed me that it is from now on (Tuesday, 7.10.2008) generally forbidden to promote or advertise Written Declarations in the European Parliament.
I am wondering how the administration may take a decision that far reaching, especially since it has been allowed for the last four years to promote Written Declarations.
Especially as the quoted paragraph of the rules of procedure do not relate to the question of setting up a poster on the passarelle or elsewhere in the house.
Maybe I am misinformed but as I understand the rules such a decision may only be taken by political bodies of the European Parliament - so far I have not seen a single note on this issue, neither from the conference of presidents nor from the quaestors.
President Pöttering, this issue is a serious interference with the right of Members of political expression which will be examined under the possibility of taking court action against the European Parliament for infringement of the rights of Members.
Also, as I have not received a clarification from you concerning the incident which happend last plenary session, please recall my emails from the 25. and 26.9.2008 addressed to you. Until today I have not received an answer.
Therefore I would again urge you to reply to the content of this email and help clarify the situation since I am sure that we both desire to avoid legal action. Additionally I belive that this is a matter of interest to all Members of the house since it touches their right of political expression.
Sincerely yours,
Alexander Alvaro
A lovely bunch, our rulers, eh?