Ian Parker-Joseph, IPJ on Politics, has posted about how the EU is beginning, post Lisbon, to impose its will on this country. Politicians pontificate on what is 'good for the country' with their policies on, for example, immigration and taxation and do not realise that they are in fact 'talking to an empty room'.
How many of the electorate are aware of these laws waiting to be implemented? When they do appear they will do so in the form of Directives or Regulations and will require implementation by our parliament without question. And the Lib/Lab/Con still think they will, if elected, govern this country?
What about COM (2009) 0078 for example? which is a "Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251(2) of the EC Treaty concerning the common positions of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2002/21/EC on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services, 2002/19/EC on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities, and 2002/20/EC on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services; a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services and 2002/58/EC concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws; and a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Group of European Regulators in Telecoms." On reading the document you will note that regardless of the Council's (Heads of Government) views, the Commission intends proceeding anyway - and that is democracy?
Consider COM (2009) 0029 which is a "Proposal for a Council Directive on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation".and from which I quote "There is a tremendous development of the mobility of taxpayers, of the number of cross border transactions and of the internationalisation of financial instruments, which makes it more and more difficult for Member States to assess taxes due properly, while they stick to national sovereignty as regards the level of taxes." And the Lib/Lab/Con still believe they can set our tax regulations?
Or COM (2009 0020 which is "aimed at further simplifying, modernising and harmonising the VAT invoicing rules."; or COM (2009) 0021 a "Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax as regards the rules on invoicing." and COM (2008) 0869 a "Proposal for a Council Decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States."
If the Lib/Lab/Con politicians wish to continue inhabiting their dream world, in which they still consider themselves our government, then it cannot be argued that that is not their right. What is not, repeat not, their right is to continue imposing this dream world on the electorate, to refuse any discussion on the basic question of who governs us and to refuse to agree that it is the electorate's right to vote on that basic question.
Autonomous Mind has posted a critique of David Cameron, of which every word is true. Making the point that Cameron has turned the Conservative Party into a version of Labour-Lite and therefore what is on offer to the electorate is more of the same but with different faces hides another suggestion that is worthy of consideration. Because, regardless of what Cameron may have said in the past and which we can now see was pure 'electioneering' - and not worth the paper on which it was written, he is - and always has, deep down - been firmly in favour of EU membership, being a Europhile, and consequently he had to change the Conservative Party in order that Britain might remain a member.
An example of the disingeniousness of Cameron and his party is that they have adopted the slogan 'Vote for Change' as an election slogan. FFS! What change? As Autonomous Mind so rightly says it is more of the same, but with different faces! Still Cameron continues with what he calls an essential "massive devolution of power to the people", yet cannot see the contradiction of that with membership of the EU. We continue to have Hague The Vague prattling on about how good and different his party will be when compared to the present government. Presenting 'a stark choice for Britain', Hague also continues the lies when he says "Where Labour have refused to control immigration we will properly control it; where they betrayed democracy by refusing a referendum we will build a referendum whenever the powers of the voters are given away into our law;" and "make the House of Commons more democratic". If Britain is unable to control total immigration then how does Hague reckon he can control it properly''? As to this promise of a referendum 'whenever the powers of voters are given away', any 'power' that is one voters should decide on is a power that has been usurped. So the first Directive or Regulation that imposes a new law, or change to an existing 'home-grown' law will trigger a referendum? Should Cameron become the next Prime Minister, he and his party had better grant that referendum or it will just confirm my suspicion that they are the 'controlling f'tards' I suspect them of being! How can Hague 'make the House of Commons more democratic' if those we send there cannot formulate the laws by which we live?
No comments:
Post a Comment