logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error
EU politics: fax democracy rebutted
Options View Go to last post Go to first unread
Previous Topic Next Topic
richard
#1 Posted : 05 January 2013 19:24:14(UTC)
Richard

Rank: Administration

Groups: Registered, Administrators
Joined: 16/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 2,946
United Kingdom
Location: Bradford

Thanks: 95 times
Was thanked: 293 time(s) in 245 post(s)
As Witterings from Witney picks up yet another example of the woeful state of ignorance on the status of Norway viz à viz EU regulation, we have to confront the prospect that there is an alarming number of people who lack basic the understanding of how the global and regional regulatory system works.

It was suggested recently that we should provide some examples of how that system works, and with that in mind we offer the "Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal".

This provides a classic example of how Norway participates directly in the regulatory process, contradicting claims that this country is forced, by virtue of its membership of the EEA, to adopt legislation from the EU without taking part in framing it.

Starting with the convention, this was adopted on 22 March 1989 by the Conference of Plenipotentiaries in Basel, Switzerland, in response to a public outcry following the discovery, in the 1980s, in Africa and other parts of the developing world of deposits of toxic wastes imported from abroad.

View full article here
Back to top
WWW
thespecialone
#2 Posted : 05 January 2013 20:14:31(UTC)
thespecialone

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 17/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 200
Man
United Kingdom
Location: Gloucestershire

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 8 time(s) in 7 post(s)
Do you think that the Conservatives don't know about all that you have been posting in the last few days or do know but just don't care; and like politicians in general will rely on 1. The media to back them up and 2. An apathetic public? Of course you could say the same about Labour and the LDs.

I feel that in the days running up to Cameron's "big speech" that the likes of the DM will be backing him even more all the and they will be printing more and more articles supporting him.

Here is what counts as politics nowadays http://www.dailymail.co....-ILLEGAL-say-Labour.html

Edited by user 05 January 2013 20:16:47(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified
Back to top
mmatis
#3 Posted : 05 January 2013 21:33:49(UTC)
mmatis

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 17/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 429
Man
United States
Location: Cocoa, Florida

Thanks: 84 times
Was thanked: 32 time(s) in 24 post(s)
You say:
Quote:
"That is not true now, and it never has been."

But truth matters not when the goal is One World Government. Orwell spelled it out very well.
Back to top
AutonomousMind
#4 Posted : 05 January 2013 21:35:47(UTC)
AutonomousMind

Rank: Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 30/12/2012(UTC)
Posts: 12
Man
United Kingdom

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
There are two things, perhaps more, that can be done here Special One.

1. Bloggers who understand the reality should put as much content online as possible setting out the reality
2. Those blogs should cross-link to every blog that is rebutting the politicians' distortions and media's repeat of them in order to improve the search ranking

Going beyond that it would help to identify 'outers' of financial means who are willing and able to put money into an awareness campaign to buy space in the papers and on the web so the facts can be set out in simple terms directly to readers.

There's a long way to go in this campaign and plenty of opportunity to rebut wild claims with hard factual evidence, at the same time building up a repository of responses to counter the falsehoods. At some point, by speaking authoritatively, it will be impossible for the mainstream media to ignore the effort and a platform will be presented to us.

“The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”
Back to top
WWW Twitter
richard
#5 Posted : 05 January 2013 21:50:41(UTC)
Richard

Rank: Administration

Groups: Registered, Administrators
Joined: 16/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 2,946
United Kingdom
Location: Bradford

Thanks: 95 times
Was thanked: 293 time(s) in 245 post(s)
Originally Posted by: AutonomousMind Go to Quoted Post
There are two things, perhaps more, that can be done here Special One.

1. Bloggers who understand the reality should put as much content online as possible setting out the reality
2. Those blogs should cross-link to every blog that is rebutting the politicians' distortions and media's repeat of them in order to improve the search ranking

Going beyond that it would help to identify 'outers' of financial means who are willing and able to put money into an awareness campaign to buy space in the papers and on the web so the facts can be set out in simple terms directly to readers.

There's a long way to go in this campaign and plenty of opportunity to rebut wild claims with hard factual evidence, at the same time building up a repository of responses to counter the falsehoods. At some point, by speaking authoritatively, it will be impossible for the mainstream media to ignore the effort and a platform will be presented to us.





TBH is doing well ... I think we can work on your plan ...

http://thefrogsalittleho.../eu-law-and-norway.html
Back to top
WWW
stuart
#6 Posted : 05 January 2013 23:06:26(UTC)
stuart

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 17/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 153
United Kingdom
Location: Andover

Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 8 post(s)
After following that Basel Convention link, I noticed that there is also a Stockholm Convention and a Rotterdam Convention. Just how many of this type of organisation are their? I noticed that Norway is listed as a country that has ratified these conventions and it declares that it recognises the International Court of Justice to settle disputes.

I think in fact that a list of this type of organisation needs to be made and who are signatories to them, along with as many examples as we can find of where regulation originates with them and comes to us via the EU. What we have here really is that the EU is an unnecessary middle man.
Back to top
richard
#7 Posted : 05 January 2013 23:47:21(UTC)
Richard

Rank: Administration

Groups: Registered, Administrators
Joined: 16/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 2,946
United Kingdom
Location: Bradford

Thanks: 95 times
Was thanked: 293 time(s) in 245 post(s)
Originally Posted by: stuart Go to Quoted Post
After following that Basel Convention link, I noticed that there is also a Stockholm Convention and a Rotterdam Convention. Just how many of this type of organisation are their? I noticed that Norway is listed as a country that has ratified these conventions and it declares that it recognises the International Court of Justice to settle disputes.

I think in fact that a list of this type of organisation needs to be made and who are signatories to them, along with as many examples as we can find of where regulation originates with them and comes to us via the EU. What we have here really is that the EU is an unnecessary middle man.






Here is a good start ...

http://www.genevaenviron...ent/guide-uk_lowres.pdf
Back to top
WWW
gareth
#8 Posted : 06 January 2013 00:45:07(UTC)
gareth

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 18/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 128

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
Originally Posted by: stuart Go to Quoted Post
After following that Basel Convention link, I noticed that there is also a Stockholm Convention and a Rotterdam Convention. Just how many of this type of organisation are their? I noticed that Norway is listed as a country that has ratified these conventions and it declares that it recognises the International Court of Justice to settle disputes.

I think in fact that a list of this type of organisation needs to be made and who are signatories to them, along with as many examples as we can find of where regulation originates with them and comes to us via the EU. What we have here really is that the EU is an unnecessary middle man.

I would say unnecessary but convenient and beneficial for the politicians. Up to 28 voices around a table (27 member states plus the EU itself in some instances) all saying the same thing is a larger lump of influence than reducing EU members to just an EU seat. For as long as that situation remains the EU will not go for a full federal existence - the benefits of weight of numbers is too good. Whether the US, China or Russia ever make noises about it I don't know.

If the truth of where legislation is birthed was more widely known the scare stories about not being a member of the EU would lose their effect. It would also perhaps diminish the standing of politicians even further with the public if we were aware that it is international bodies who are shaping some of the more important pieces of legislation we are subjected to.
Back to top
Clarence
#9 Posted : 06 January 2013 09:08:31(UTC)
Clarence

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 18/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 66

Was thanked: 14 time(s) in 10 post(s)
Originally Posted by: stuart Go to Quoted Post

I think in fact that a list of this type of organisation needs to be made and who are signatories to them, along with as many examples as we can find of where regulation originates with them and comes to us via the EU. What we have here really is that the EU is an unnecessary middle man.
I think it's far worse than unnecessary. Our voice is diluted to 3.7% because the UK is not sitting at the table – the EU is there on our behalf.

We know from other cases how damaging it is to be represented by the EU. Hugely reliant compared to the other 26 EU states on food imports from third countries (non-EU members), we suffer badly from discriminatory import tariffs set by the EU. So, although our government would still put tariffs on some countries' goods if we were not in the EU, those tariffs would likely be far lower (because we were not keeping French farmers in mind when we set the price).

It's not so much a case of "We'd get this legislation anyway if we weren't in the EU". It's more like "We'd be far more influential in framing this legislation before it reached us if we weren't in the EU."

Edited by user 06 January 2013 09:09:34(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified
Back to top
WWW
richard
#10 Posted : 06 January 2013 09:08:54(UTC)
Richard

Rank: Administration

Groups: Registered, Administrators
Joined: 16/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 2,946
United Kingdom
Location: Bradford

Thanks: 95 times
Was thanked: 293 time(s) in 245 post(s)
Originally Posted by: gareth Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: stuart Go to Quoted Post
After following that Basel Convention link, I noticed that there is also a Stockholm Convention and a Rotterdam Convention. Just how many of this type of organisation are their? I noticed that Norway is listed as a country that has ratified these conventions and it declares that it recognises the International Court of Justice to settle disputes.

I think in fact that a list of this type of organisation needs to be made and who are signatories to them, along with as many examples as we can find of where regulation originates with them and comes to us via the EU. What we have here really is that the EU is an unnecessary middle man.

I would say unnecessary but convenient and beneficial for the politicians. Up to 28 voices around a table (27 member states plus the EU itself in some instances) all saying the same thing is a larger lump of influence than reducing EU members to just an EU seat. For as long as that situation remains the EU will not go for a full federal existence - the benefits of weight of numbers is too good. Whether the US, China or Russia ever make noises about it I don't know.

If the truth of where legislation is birthed was more widely known the scare stories about not being a member of the EU would lose their effect. It would also perhaps diminish the standing of politicians even further with the public if we were aware that it is international bodies who are shaping some of the more important pieces of legislation we are subjected to.




I don't think people even begin to realise the extent to which legislation is originated by international and intergovernmental bodies. The EU is a relatively minor league player, forming only one cog in a vast law-making factory on a global scale. And the down side of this is that, when we ditch the EU, it will actually make very little difference to the flood of legislation. All that will happen is that it will come as us via a slightly different route - cutting out the middle-man, as you put it.
Back to top
WWW
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF 1.9.6.1 | YAF © 2003-2013, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.237 seconds.