open Democracy News Analysis - EU - Comments

owly on "Saying Yes 2 Europe"

owly — Fri, 29 May 2009 09:05:12 +0100

How many candidates are 'Cornish Democrats' fielding in the European and Local Elections ? At the last General Election did you field a candidate in all Cornish seats and how many votes did you get ? Just exactly what democratic support do you have in Cornwall ? You speak of democracy so let us all know how you figure in that democracy.

Toque on "Saying Yes 2 Europe"

Toque — Fri, 29 May 2009 03:24:53 +0100

The Cornish Democrat wrote:

that you target the EU for criticism instead of focusing on the real democratic battles to be won in the UK just beggars belief.

If you check my blog you'll see that I rarely, if ever, target the EU - it's almost entirely about the UK. But I rather suspect that you already know that.

As for Cornwall, I don't live there. I live in the EU and therefore have more than a passing interest in its democracy, or lack thereof. If Cornwall is a nation, and a foreign one at that, as you seem to suggest, then vote for your Cornish Party and secede. Please stop complaining to me because there's nothing that I can do about it - honestly. I have my own battles to fight and I'm completely uninterested in yours, as I have explained to you on many, many occasions, and at great length, repeatedly.

It's not just 'europhobes' that are so keen to berate the EU for it's lack of democracy. It's pretty much everyone. Or had you not noticed? I'm not, and never have been, a europhobe.

The Cornish Democrat on "Saying Yes 2 Europe"

The Cornish Democrat — Thu, 28 May 2009 19:56:09 +0100

Toque wrote:

The MO of the EU is the most distasteful thing about it. The entire project has always been underhand, they have schools, churches (the Church of England was given a bursary to campaign for regions), regional bodies, all working for the cause. Even the BBC is funded by them. They have their tentacles in every aspect of national life. If I were a conspiracy theorist..

And you don't think the funding by the tax payer of organisations that promote the English national identity in Kernow at the expense of the indigenous Cornish identity is any worse? But then again Gareth you just don't care about such Cornishy things do you? So much for consistency and intellectual honesty.

It's not that I have anything against the other nations in the UK or cooperating with them, it's just cooperating with a much larger number of nations and regions across the European Continent would be far better. So good luck to Yes2Europe and I hope you severely maul the Lib Dems.

As for all the europhobes so keen to berate the EU for its lack of democracy. The EU is not perfect, no question there, but that you target the EU for criticism instead of focusing on the real democratic battles to be won in the UK just beggars belief.

The Cornish Democrat

Toque on "Saying Yes 2 Europe"

Toque — Wed, 27 May 2009 22:41:57 +0100

'Soul for Europe' is an ecumenical crusade paid for by the EU, whose applicants must fill the following criteria:

they must have a “religious or ethical inspiration”.
they must “help to interpret and give meaning to the process of European unification”.
they must “explicitly promote the integration of Europe”.
they must “publicly acknowledge that assistance has been received from the European Union”.

Creepy!

I don't suppose there's EU money available to oppose organised religion and EU integration? No, didn't think so.

Turkey's accession will be interesting. Certain nations have already shown their true colours over their attitudes
to the Eastern bloc countries. United in Diverity will become United in Trade but Intensely Xenophobic. On the plus side it will halt the relentless and undemocratic integration process.

I've reached the grand old age of 35 without ever having an opportunity to vote on the EU. I'm determined to have one, even if it is ignored.

owly on "Saying Yes 2 Europe"

owly — Wed, 27 May 2009 21:01:16 +0100

Trouble with the EU is that it is basically unreformable. The EU and the political class, and indeed the chattering classes (as exemplified by writers here), do not have the slightest regard for the views of the people. We have no right to interfere in their arid delusions and where we have been consulted, and have rejected their vision, they have merely carried on regardless. Notice how we are denied a say on the EU Constitution even though we were promised this at the last election. The people have been treated with contempt, so all the vested interests can hardly complain when the people are suspicious of their plans.

Of course the EU is profoundly undemocratic and authoritarian, basically at odds with everything these islands have ever stood for. That is at the nub of the British ambivalence towards the EU. We should never have joined and we should negotiate a new relationship with the EU. It would be to the benefit of all really.

Toque on "Saying Yes 2 Europe"

Toque — Wed, 27 May 2009 18:55:36 +0100

It does seem a bit eccentric, yes. I suppose my attitude towards the EU is slightly eccentric because I agree with allowing Turkey in, and I agree with freedom to work around the EU, but I'm also very opposed to the lack of democracy, the anti-libertarian tendencies, the regionalism and economic protectionism.

Do I want Britain at the heart of the EU in order that we can 'reform it from the inside'? On balance, probably not. I doubt that we can and we have enough of our own problems without having to get our heads around things like this. It's not the concept of the EU that I'm opposed to, it's the politics of it - I feel much the same way about the United Kingdom.

Guy Aitchison on "Saying Yes 2 Europe"

Guy Aitchison — Wed, 27 May 2009 18:24:30 +0100

A slightly eccentric ranking you'd think, Gareth, with the Greens next to UKIP. But I'm sure you're glad Labour's bottom. (I got Greens followed by the Lib Dems)

eutube on "Saying Yes 2 Europe"

eutube — Wed, 27 May 2009 11:17:01 +0100

I wish you best of luck for June 4th, but it looks like we're once again going to be turning our back on Europe just when it's most needed.

Tore Toivicco on "The Lisbon Treaty: Ireland’s awful secret"

Tore Toivicco — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 22:12:35 +0000

Message to irish people about Lisbon treaty:

Lisbon treaty seems to be totally strange and deleting democracy or human rights?

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2008/01/lisbon-treaty-c.html

I’ve read an article which states that police gets rights to shoot people in some situations.

These kind of things are totalitarian politics.

It also propably stops right to go on strike.

http://www.no2lisbon.ie/en/press-centre/entry/160

And all this in whole Europe…

It is sad to notice that all other countries have accepted this treaty, but many governments have not even given people chance to vote about it.

Irish government has given you this right,…anyway it is really strange that Ireland maybe votes again about this, and only after few months?(or 2009?)

EU elite needs this YES, and they have ordered new voting?

If this is true it shows how horrible secret elite rules EU, and what can we expect from the future?
Lisbon treaty is basicly giving ‘Gestapo’-laws to EU-government, if needed?

And they seem to need those laws fast?

Vote NO, and save the world?

F.ex. in many european countries media and politicians has almost 100% ignored discussions about this subject, and people are not even aware about whole thing?

It is also good to remember that USA has now similar ‘mertial laws’ there, after 11th september 2001… ?

EU security officials decide about all security matters of whole EU?

Also there is some things which makes it very difficult for normal people to complain and get things corrected if there is wrongful handlings?

I hope I am wrong, but this whole thing , and how it has been handled seems really wrong? And it is not a democratic way to handle politics.?

http://www.europeanfoundation.org/docs/Treaty%20of%20Lisbon.htm

ps.

I am harassed so much all the time that this writing may include errors.

-Tore Toivicco

Guy Aitchison on "R.I.P the Acre c1300-2008"

Guy Aitchison — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 10:51:37 +0100

Thanks Paul, great link. That corporate power dominates the EU is something I think more and more people are becoming aware of.

Paul Kingsnorth on "R.I.P the Acre c1300-2008"

Paul Kingsnorth — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:49:06 +0100

Peter really does live in a strange little world of his own.

A world in which 'diversity' is great when it means EU-enforced regional assemblies, but terrible when it allows cheesemongers to decide how to sell their stilton.

A world in which 'democracy' is worth going to the wire for when it comes to the dreadful top-down imposition of an English Parliament onto the struggling natives of Cheshire, but worth ignoring when it comes to people who might want to drink pints, rather than half litres, of beer.

A world in which history and cultural particularity are excellent reasons for resisting English governance, but terrible reasons for resisting European governance.

A world in which enforcing global standardisation of everything, from the centre, with no consultation, is both 'progressive' and 'rational.'

Why don't you stand for parliament, Peter? Let's see how many of the sturdy local yeoman support your point of view. (Am I still allowed to say 'yeoman', by the way, or has that been legislated away in the name of efficiency too? It is a bit English.)

On an entirely separate point, no-one has yet mentioned the real driver behind European - and indeed global - standardisation: corporate power. This stuff happens because the multinationals who write European legislation find it makes their work easier:

http://www.corporateeurope.org

Given the choice - which of course they never are, in case they make the wrong one - the diverse peoples of the European continent would doubtless have been happy to keep doing things their own way - and Europe would be a more colourful, diverse and, hell, even democratic place for it.

annlonholdt on "R.I.P the Acre c1300-2008"

annlonholdt — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 19:16:59 +0100

I live in Denmark and right now we have a big debate because the judges in the common market can now cancel laws in denmark regarding who is allowed to come into denmark.

The discussion is that it seems that judges are making decisions and not politcians, and that judges cannot be fired. If the Lisbon treaty goes through then even more power will be given to the courts of the common market -

As in your discussion about acres, decisions were made many years ago by politicians. They have been just sitting in at meets in Brussels like the spectators in the muppet show!

Toque on "R.I.P the Acre c1300-2008"

Toque — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:07:28 +0100

"Across Europe, companies and organisations take it for granted that
they will have to produce materials in English; we are not expected to
make that concession."

Not true. I used to work for a medical diagnostics company who sold their immunodiagnostics across Europe in vials labelled in English - it made sense because all doctors and scientists speak English.

However, in their wisdom, the EU brought in some regulations that made it a legal requirement for us to label the vials in the langauge of the market we were selling it in. Specialist diagnostics is not a huge market so it just wasn't worth our while (the expense and effort) to produce labels for the thousands of products so that we could sell in Greece or Portugal or Finland. So we didn't bother. So people in those countries - cancer patients - now suffer for want of diagnostics that are not available. It's may not be such a problem for the massive pharmaceutical companies, but to the small innovative outfits that can't afford to send their 1000s of products to market in 30 different languages it is. And it therefore stiffles R&D and diagnosis of life-threatening disease.

Having said all that I wouldn't subscribe to Peter's argument that everyone should be "obliged" to change to English ("it might be a bit of a pain for a few weeks but that's all"). I just wouldn't bother legislating and leave it up to the relevant authorities as to whether doctors can use English-labelled diagnostics (and the relevant authoritiy is not the EU, it is the national government and professional associations of the country in question). That sort of free-market, deregulated freedom to think has been all but extinguished by the EU.

James Graham UD on "R.I.P the Acre c1300-2008"

James Graham UD — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 11:50:59 +0100

Anthony - as Peter implies you appear to be arguing against the principle set out in the Magna Carta that there should be a standard system of weights and measures throughout the country. There is a good reason why the Barons considered that to be of fundamental importance. There is a similarly good reason why this is one of the few powers we knowingly gave to the Common Market in 1974.

How is using a hectare a denial of history? What is ahistorical is to suggest the acre we use now has existed for 700 years. It has only existing for 130 years, following the passing of the Weights and Measures Act. But then, scratch beneath the surface and consistantly what you find is that Britain's historical traditions tend to date from a time when we were ruled over by a bunch of Germans. History consistently shows us not how unique we are but how interdependent we are within the rest of Europe.

Can't export British land? Well, a large amount of it isn't owned by the British these days. Much of London, including most of the block of flats where I currently have a toehold, is now owned by congolomerates based in Hong Kong. The land market is a global one. Personally I don't have a problem with that - my problem is the fact that we don't have a system of land value taxation to clawback all the wealth generated by it all. But what is more significant: the fact that County Hall is measured in hectares, or the fact that it is owned by a Japanese businessman? It seems to me that by obsessing about things like weights and measures we consistently miss the bigger picture.

Gareth - the reason I don't speak in esperanto is because esperanto isn't the standard. The standard, much to the chagrin of the French, is English. This is crucial because the fact is it works both ways. Across Europe, companies and organisations take it for granted that they will have to produce materials in English; we are not expected to make that concession.

We could go down the route, as people here seem to be suggesting, of attempting to preserve the tertiary aspects of our culture in aspic. Of course that would be an exceedingly French thing to do. It is likely to be as futile as the French's attempts as well.

padav on "R.I.P the Acre c1300-2008"

padav — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:14:30 +0100

I know you don't accept them Gareth, which is why you are frantically avoiding the points of principle I have highlighted

Units of measure play an immense role in the commercial environment, which is now globalised - even you have accepted that point. You are defending the retention of imperial measures on cultural grounds, which is a smokescreen designed to deflect attention from this principle.

Diversity? Who mentioned diversity (oh I forgot, you did!) - what relevance does that have to the use of measuring systems?

I find your barbed comment ironic because you know better than most that I am very much in favour of a more diverse society; who needs the straight jacket of imposed "Englishness" when you can have many different more localised traditions?

Peter Davidson, Alderley Edge, NW.England