I was somewhat confused and alarmed by Arthur’s Grove’s letter in the WMN from 6 February (see below), which suggests that the vast majority of our MPs in Westminster should be made redundant. For a UKIP member to come out with such a statement strikes me as odd to say the least. Furthermore, the case he builds up against the EU is fundamentally flawed. *************
With regard to Eric Sheppard's letter of January 22 about redundant MPs, I have noticed recently that increasing numbers of people are questioning the need to keep so many MPs at Westminster while at least 70 per cent of laws and directives controlling our lives come from decisions made in Brussels.On reading the excellent book by Richard North and Christopher Booker entitled The Great Deception - not matters of opinion, but historical facts researched in great depth and detail - I was both appalled and furious to learn of the devious methods and complete indifference to the masses shown by the architects of the European Union project. For example the people must be taken in by gradual stages so that they do not realise what is happening to them, and for some years National Parliaments would be left in being in order to lull the populace into thinking they are being governed by those elected to national Parliaments. The corrupt, wasteful system created is therefore in parallel with the devious methods of its creators. It is logical, therefore, to demand a larger reduction in the number of MPs; only a small number are now required to implement EU decisions, As Eric Sheppard states, "make the remainder redundant as they are now surplus to requirements". It is a situation of their own making, brought about by pursuing EU involvement and surrendering our once self-governing democracy, something which belongs to all of us, and is not for the politicians to give away. It is said that the pen is mightier than the sword, and this is shown to be correct. Our political class have undermined our identity and national pride by signing with the pen that which Hitler and other dictators could not achieve with the sword. I have just read Anthony Steen's comments about inadequate allowances for MPs. I suggest therefore that, as a representative of the Tory Party that has been responsible for surrendering more of British self-government to the EU than any other, from Heath to John Major, if he is not satisfied he should place himself among those who have made themselves redundant through EU involvement. Arthur GroveUKIP Newton Abbot |
e enjte, 7 shkurt 2008
For an EU based on subsidiarity
e mërkurë, 12 dhjetor 2007
Why does Russia go for Britain's cultural jugular?
The UK and Russia have not been the best of diplomatic buddies of late - that's for sure. Today's announcement however that the British Council's licence would be revoked in Russia's regions (i.e outside Moscow) as of January 2008 is both puzzling and, upon reflection, chilling...
In an interview with the BBC, Russia's Foreign Minsiter Sergei Lavrov said that following the explusion of four Russian diplomats from London earlier this year - some form of retaliation from Moscow was to be expected. But why not just send some British diplomats back to London then? Why instead have a go at the UK's leading cultural and English language institution - the British Council? What has British cultural and linguistic heritage ever done to the Russians that would warrant such a move? Are we really to believe claims that a violation of tax regulations is behind this move? Mr Lavrov has himself revealed that the diplomatic dispute is the underlying cause.
Could it possibly be that the Kremlin would not be satisfied with merely ruffling feathers in Whitehall and Westminster, but is rather seeking to send a potent and chilling message that Britain, its culture and what it stands for are less and less welcome in today's Russia?
I only hope this turns out to be a manifestation of my overactive imagination...
In an interview with the BBC, Russia's Foreign Minsiter Sergei Lavrov said that following the explusion of four Russian diplomats from London earlier this year - some form of retaliation from Moscow was to be expected. But why not just send some British diplomats back to London then? Why instead have a go at the UK's leading cultural and English language institution - the British Council? What has British cultural and linguistic heritage ever done to the Russians that would warrant such a move? Are we really to believe claims that a violation of tax regulations is behind this move? Mr Lavrov has himself revealed that the diplomatic dispute is the underlying cause.
Could it possibly be that the Kremlin would not be satisfied with merely ruffling feathers in Whitehall and Westminster, but is rather seeking to send a potent and chilling message that Britain, its culture and what it stands for are less and less welcome in today's Russia?
I only hope this turns out to be a manifestation of my overactive imagination...
e shtunë, 1 dhjetor 2007
The Balkan situation will make or break the European project
European Integration as the "guardian of peace" may at first glance appear a dated concept (and one which I and many Western Europeans under the age of sixty will respect rather than fully appreciate). Many of us are fortunate to have known nothing other than peace, and the EU has needed to find other raisons d'etre as the decades have gone by.
That's Western Europe though. Go to the Balkans and it's quite a different story. With the disputes over Kosovo and ever-growing instablity in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the region is on the verge of plummeting into chaos.
This region will be the ulitmate test for the EU's common foreign and security policy. If it fails to safeguard stability on its own doorstep, then what hope does it have of ever being taken seriously as a world player? Whatsmore, failure to ensure stability in the Balkans and prevent the atrocities of the previous decade would seriously compromise the founding principle of the European project - that of ensuring and exporting peace and stability.
That's Western Europe though. Go to the Balkans and it's quite a different story. With the disputes over Kosovo and ever-growing instablity in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the region is on the verge of plummeting into chaos.
This region will be the ulitmate test for the EU's common foreign and security policy. If it fails to safeguard stability on its own doorstep, then what hope does it have of ever being taken seriously as a world player? Whatsmore, failure to ensure stability in the Balkans and prevent the atrocities of the previous decade would seriously compromise the founding principle of the European project - that of ensuring and exporting peace and stability.
e enjte, 29 nëntor 2007
"Hungary....what's that??"
I'm the last person you'll find indulging in a rant against the Americans. I take those generalist claims that Americans are ignorant about everything that lies beyond their borders with the smallest pinch of salt.
That said, you've got to check out the video at the below link - it's a right shocker!
http://comment.blog.hu/2007/11/27/magyarorszag_az_meg_mi
That said, you've got to check out the video at the below link - it's a right shocker!
http://comment.blog.hu/2007/11/27/magyarorszag_az_meg_mi
e premte, 7 shtator 2007
Turkey's New President
The appointment of the Islamist Abdullah Gul as Turkey’s new President on 28 August marked a significant step in a country which has a proud recent history of adhering to secular principles. The road to the most senior post in the land has not been a smooth one for Mr. Gul – his candidature was confronted with vehement and widespread protest from the country’s military and pro-secular movements in April this year. Yet the forced early elections which ensued saw Mr Gul’s party, the AKP, take an even larger share of the vote, making his re-nomination and subsequent appointment as President near impossible to reject.
While his appointment as President may still prove a somewhat divisive issue in Turkey, what are the implications for the country’s relations with the EU?
The question of Turkey’s EU accession has been (and doubtless will remain) a major subject of debate, yet the fact remains that Turkey has now been an official EU candidate for nearly 3 years, after nearly 50 years of “privileged partnership” and numerous prospects of membership talks which never came to fruition. A major proponent of Turkey’s EU membership in his former role as Foreign Minister, President Gul has reaffirmed Turkey’s commitment to pursuing the accession agenda with Brussels, which will see the country continue to align its legislation, institutions and practices with the acquis communautaire – the EU’s legislative package which must be adopted by all States wishing to join the Union.
While Mr. Gul’s appointment has been welcomed by Commission President José Manuel Barroso as an opportunity for Turkey’s leadership to provide “fresh, immediate and positive impetus to the accession process”, other leaders in Europe will doubtless be using the appointment to reaffirm their objections to allowing the relatively poor Muslim nation of some 70 million to join a bloc which they (and many others) already see as becoming increasingly unmanageable.
Economic ties and foreign direct investment have never been stronger however, while European tourists have been and continue to choose Turkey as an accessible and welcoming holiday destination. These factors, coupled with Turkey’s continued commitment to align its legislation and practices with EU standards, will make it increasingly difficult for those who oppose the country’s accession plans to justify their stance – let alone go back on a promise already made.
While his appointment as President may still prove a somewhat divisive issue in Turkey, what are the implications for the country’s relations with the EU?
The question of Turkey’s EU accession has been (and doubtless will remain) a major subject of debate, yet the fact remains that Turkey has now been an official EU candidate for nearly 3 years, after nearly 50 years of “privileged partnership” and numerous prospects of membership talks which never came to fruition. A major proponent of Turkey’s EU membership in his former role as Foreign Minister, President Gul has reaffirmed Turkey’s commitment to pursuing the accession agenda with Brussels, which will see the country continue to align its legislation, institutions and practices with the acquis communautaire – the EU’s legislative package which must be adopted by all States wishing to join the Union.
While Mr. Gul’s appointment has been welcomed by Commission President José Manuel Barroso as an opportunity for Turkey’s leadership to provide “fresh, immediate and positive impetus to the accession process”, other leaders in Europe will doubtless be using the appointment to reaffirm their objections to allowing the relatively poor Muslim nation of some 70 million to join a bloc which they (and many others) already see as becoming increasingly unmanageable.
Economic ties and foreign direct investment have never been stronger however, while European tourists have been and continue to choose Turkey as an accessible and welcoming holiday destination. These factors, coupled with Turkey’s continued commitment to align its legislation and practices with EU standards, will make it increasingly difficult for those who oppose the country’s accession plans to justify their stance – let alone go back on a promise already made.
e enjte, 30 gusht 2007
Bravo, Commission! Time to put the tabloids in their place
I was delighted to enter the European Commission's homepage today and find the below article which I think is an excellent retort to populist, irresponsible and frankly erroneous tabloid journalism out to have yet another dig at its favourite victim - the EU. Well done!!
***************
Euromyths – time to set the record straight
The truth behind that tabloid standard – ‘the latest crazy idea from Brussels'.
The popular press often runs scare stories about plans by "mad eurocrats" – for example to standardise the sizes of condoms or women's clothes, or ban bendy bananas.
Remember this from the Daily Express? "The latest EU ruling will see British women expand beyond recognition." And the story behind it? A mooted standardisation of clothes sizes, based on centimetres not inches. However, there is no such EU ruling – European standards are developed by voluntary agreement between national bodies, with no input from Brussels.
This is just one example of a so-called Euromyth – untrue or distorted information on the EU spread by the media. While some stories are based on facts which are misinterpreted or exaggerated, others are simply made up – like the story published in "The Sun" on alleged EU plans to change the name of the Indian snack "Bombay mix" to "Mumbai mix", for the sake of political correctness. It was dreamt up by the editor of a news agency who said it was "meant to be funny for the tabloids".
Euromyths originate most frequently in the British tabloid press. Other tall tales include the harmonisation of condom sizes – as with clothes sizes, the EU has nothing to do with setting these standards – and a ban on "excessively curved" bananas. This story at least contains a grain of truth: bananas must be "free from malformation or abnormal curvature" if they are to be sold under the "extra class" category - but the EU has never attempted to ban them. And it is important to remember that it is industry and consumers who want standards for goods, not a bunch of "mad Eurocrats" sitting in Brussels!
British journalists are not the only ones with a fertile imagination. When the Danish weekly Søndagsavisen reported on subsidised Viagra pills for eurocrats, another Euromyth was born. What the paper forgot to mention: expenses for Viagra are only covered by EU staff's health insurance for impotence caused by serious illnesses like cancer. And of the EU's thousands of staff members, medical reimbursements for the drug are currently granted to around ten.
Although these stories are a funny read, they hold a dangerous potential – spreading rapidly on the internet and in other media, they live on as accepted truths in public opinion and shape the public's idea of the EU as a meddlesome controller.
The popular press often runs scare stories about plans by "mad eurocrats" – for example to standardise the sizes of condoms or women's clothes, or ban bendy bananas.
Remember this from the Daily Express? "The latest EU ruling will see British women expand beyond recognition." And the story behind it? A mooted standardisation of clothes sizes, based on centimetres not inches. However, there is no such EU ruling – European standards are developed by voluntary agreement between national bodies, with no input from Brussels.
This is just one example of a so-called Euromyth – untrue or distorted information on the EU spread by the media. While some stories are based on facts which are misinterpreted or exaggerated, others are simply made up – like the story published in "The Sun" on alleged EU plans to change the name of the Indian snack "Bombay mix" to "Mumbai mix", for the sake of political correctness. It was dreamt up by the editor of a news agency who said it was "meant to be funny for the tabloids".
Euromyths originate most frequently in the British tabloid press. Other tall tales include the harmonisation of condom sizes – as with clothes sizes, the EU has nothing to do with setting these standards – and a ban on "excessively curved" bananas. This story at least contains a grain of truth: bananas must be "free from malformation or abnormal curvature" if they are to be sold under the "extra class" category - but the EU has never attempted to ban them. And it is important to remember that it is industry and consumers who want standards for goods, not a bunch of "mad Eurocrats" sitting in Brussels!
British journalists are not the only ones with a fertile imagination. When the Danish weekly Søndagsavisen reported on subsidised Viagra pills for eurocrats, another Euromyth was born. What the paper forgot to mention: expenses for Viagra are only covered by EU staff's health insurance for impotence caused by serious illnesses like cancer. And of the EU's thousands of staff members, medical reimbursements for the drug are currently granted to around ten.
Although these stories are a funny read, they hold a dangerous potential – spreading rapidly on the internet and in other media, they live on as accepted truths in public opinion and shape the public's idea of the EU as a meddlesome controller.
e martë, 3 korrik 2007
Horny Commission
Has the European Commission gone utterly bonkers? While it understandbly wishes to shake of its rather dusty and dry reputation - was a video depicting multiple copulation scenes from European cinema not a bridge too far?The EU is great, it's necessary, and it's noble...but I don't think it'll ever be sexy. Try again, Ms Wallstrom...
Abonohu te:
Postimet (Atom)
