"With the wretched Lisbon Treaty coming into force this month, we had a briefing on its implications today in the European Conservatives Group in Brussels. This included, inter alia, a briefing from my good colleague Ashley Fox, who represents South West England, on relations with national parliaments.
"Apologists for the Lisbon Treaty, like the Lib Dem MEP Andrew Duff (Eastern England), like to claim that Lisbon enhances the powers of national parliaments. Duff is a pleasant enough chap, and I hesitate to accuse him of the mendacious deceitfulness which characterises his party. But he must know that this claim is nonsense. Let's consider the process.
"Lisbon gives national parliaments certain rights to be informed of EU decisions (as if they could not be so informed). It then offers the right for a third of national parliaments, acting together, to express their reservations to the Commission if they feel that a Commission proposal compromises subsidiarity (a right they presumably had anyway, with or without Lisbon). This is the so-called "Yellow Card". The Commission has to consider this objection but can proceed with its proposal if it doesn´t consider it is justified.
"Should the Commission ignore the "yellow card" then a simple majority of national parliaments (currently fourteen) can raise a second objection to the Commission. This is the so-called "Orange Card". And this requires action: the Commission must then refer the objection to the Council and the European parliament for a resolution.
"So how will this work in practice? For a start, there is no trans-national mechanism for co-operation between national parliaments, so it is difficult to envisage the Yellow/Orange Card procedure being invoked at all. And if it is invoked? The Yellow Card is a paper tiger. It has no teeth: the Commission can ignore it. And the Orange Card? Given that the Council consists of national governments, who broadly control their national parliaments, and given further that the European parliament always favours more, and more rapid, EU integration, it is extraordinarily improbable that the Council and parliament together would act to block a Commission proposal and to support a demand for subsidiarity.
"So the procedure is likely to have no effect at all, even if invoked, which is unlikely in the first place. Why, therefore is the procedure in the Treaty at all? It is merely window dressing and spin. It is there simply so that people like Andrew Duff can talk about "increased powers for national parliaments", knowing those "powers" to be so circumscribed as to be meaningless.
"Needless to say, there is no Red Card."
Wednesday, 13 January 2010
European Union Lies and Liberal Democrat Spin - Roger Helmer MEP
Cambridge Councillor Saves General Election Night In City
Regular readers of this blog will know that Giles McNeill has been supporting the campaign to Save General Election Night (facebook group here) since early September 2009.
"This Council believes that the interests of democracy and the country are best served if the result of a general election is confirmed as soon as possible after the close of polls. It therefore strongly supports general election counts being conducted on election night immediately following the close of polls, and requests that the returning officer takes note of this opinion."It was passed by the council and Cllr. Howell now reports on his blog that the council's chief executive and returning officer for Cambridge at the General
"As Returning Officer I have now had a chance to review the arrangements for election counts with the Democratic Services Manager and electoral services staff and have undertaken a risk assessment of the risks inherent in a Thursday night count, particularly for a combined election.
"I can confirm that we will go ahead with a parliamentary count on the Thursday night as in previous years."
Congratulations to Cllr. Howell and indeed the councillors from all parties in the city for making their views known and ensuring that General Election Night has been saved in Cambridge.
Acknowledgement: ConservativeHome | Local Government | 12/01/10
GE2010: Conservatives First 'Long Campaign' Poster Spoted in Lincoln
Related content: 'GE2010: William Hague Launch Campaign Poster in Leeds' and 'Conservative Launch Agenda for the NHS'.
The Conservative Party's poster, seen by many as kicking off the party's General Election campaign has been spotted in Lincoln on Broadgate near the Duke of Wellington public house.
Above: The poster from a distance sits proudly next to the Duke of Wellington (left)
Below: David Cameron's personal message:
"We can't go on like this. I'll cut the deficit, not the NHS."
Update of Rugby Club's Planning Application
The Planning Officer at West Lindsey District Council, Ms Jackie Jones, yesterday joined a meeting regarding the Lincoln Rugby Football Club's planning application with both the Highway Authority from Lincolnshire County Council and the agent involved in the application.
The district council's planning department are not at present in a position to make any recommendation on this application as additional information has been requested particularly in respect of highway and sustainability issues. Further no final report is at present available from the highway authority as they also are awaiting further information.
Ms Jones reports that:
"I am therefore unable to provide you with a date when it would be envisaged to place the application before committee but I can assure you it will not be before March at the earliest."Doubtlessly those at the Rugby Club will be disappointed that their application is being held up in this way, whilst opponents will doubtlessly rejoice. What is forgotten however, are the people continue into 2010 in a state of uncertainty.
Tuesday, 12 January 2010
'Outrageously Rude' Liberal Democrat Resigns
Update to ''Outrageously Rude' Liberal Democrat Condemned'.
A Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate has been forced to resign after pressure from a Conservative opponent over sexually gratuitous smears.
Last week the activities of Mr. Greg Stone, the Liberal Democrat candidate for Newcastle-upon-Tyne East, were highlighted by Jonathan Isaby on ConservativeHome. He had been using a pseudonym to post extremely personal attacks on Conservative and Labour MPs on the Guido Fawkes blog and his suitability to remain as a parliamentary candidate was raised by his Conservative opponent, Mr. Dominic Llewellyn who commented on his blog here.
Yesterday, Mr. Stone finally realised that his position was untenable and resigned.
A Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate has been forced to resign after pressure from a Conservative opponent over sexually gratuitous smears.
Last week the activities of Mr. Greg Stone, the Liberal Democrat candidate for Newcastle-upon-Tyne East, were highlighted by Jonathan Isaby on ConservativeHome. He had been using a pseudonym to post extremely personal attacks on Conservative and Labour MPs on the Guido Fawkes blog and his suitability to remain as a parliamentary candidate was raised by his Conservative opponent, Mr. Dominic Llewellyn who commented on his blog here.
Yesterday, Mr. Stone finally realised that his position was untenable and resigned.
GE2010: Lincoln: Karl McCartney Angry at Lincolnshire Echo's Edits
Related content 'Echo Readers to Quiz Parliamentary Candidates', 'GE2010: Lincoln: Reg Shore U-Turns and Waffles.', 'GE2010: Lincoln: 'Karl McCartney is On The Attack.' and 'GE2010: Lincoln: Gillian Merron Knows Her City'.
An angry Mr. Karl McCartney, Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Lincoln, has hit out at the Lincolnshire Echo over edits that were made to his responses to questions poised by readers last week.
It is understood that Mr. McCartney is in discussion with the papers editorial team.
Reproduced below are the answers Mr. McCartney issued to the paper. Based on these answer I have revised Mr. McCartney score to 8/10 pegging him with the emolient answers given by Ms Merron.
Jonathan Holmes asks: “As a student, I am struggling to survive on the financial support available. Would any of you support a proposed rise in tuition fees at a time when many people are struggling to afford university in the first place?”
As a Conservative, I believe every person who could benefit from a university education should have the opportunity to do so if they wish.
But the proportion of young people going to university has scarcely changed in the last eight years. At the current rate, it would take Labour over a century to meet their 50 per cent target. Aiming for such numbers has already had an adverse effect on standards within universities. Anyone can recognise higher fees have brought benefits to universities but we need to ensure they are providing a better student experience in return. The Conservative Party has called on the Labour Government to start a full review of the higher education sector and tuition fees now, not in two years time. But it is only right that those who benefit from higher education should meet some of the cost of their degree.
Keith Bean asks: “What is your position on fox hunting? Are you for or against?”
I am very aware the current Labour MP for Lincoln is proud of the 700 hours of parliamentary time and the expense her and her Labour Party have spent in Government coming up with this flawed law. It may be a priority for her and her party but there are more important issues for the people of Lincoln, and our nation in these difficult times.
Not one fox has been saved by their legislation – it is bad legislation and should be repealed. There are much more important issues that any Government has the duty to deal with. It’s not an issue that pre-occupies those in Lincoln who have lost jobs; who serve or have families in the armed forces; who worry about the levels of service our NHS will be able to offer in Lincolnshire, who want the best for their children and see so many children leaving Lincoln every morning to be educated.
Mr P Rives asks: “Past articles in the Echo have said heavy rail freight is to be diverted through Lincoln. The High Street will have to be closed to traffic and even pedestrians must use a bridge or an underpass. If elected will the candidates oppose this madness by every means possible?”
As one of the many residents of Lincoln who has been held up on countless occasions by the rail barriers, I would of course want to minimise the delays caused by freight trains travelling through the city centre during the day.
I also realise the whole transport system in Lincoln is seriously overloaded. However, being realistic, Network Rail as an operator of the track and infrastructure of the railways unfortunately has carte blanche to do what it likes.
A re-instated footbridge would of course be helpful, especially as the road underpass/subway at the junction of Wigford Way, St. Mary’s Street and High Street often floods and is then closed to pedestrians. That would imply any rail underpass would suffer the same.
Whoever Lincoln’s MP is, they need to work with council and business leaders in the county to help solve the problematic rail, road and other transport infrastructure issues that beset Lincoln and Lincolnshire.
Penny Kemp asks: “Would you vote to get rid of the minimum wage?”
Having experienced working at the lower end of the economic scale in my teenage years and early 20s, I am pleased many workers of all ages in similar situations are no longer taken advantage of.
However, this Labour Government’s record is woefully poor and disheartening. Figures from early 2009 show the number of people paid less than the minimum wage has doubled from 248,000 in 2005 to 445,000 in 2008.
Dave Hansell asks: “Do you think MPs should be allowed to have second jobs?”
Yes I do for many reasons. If you stop MPs from having second jobs, then who would run the Government machine? If any MP is good enough to be able to perform their duties as a constituency MP, and also be a part of the Governmental system as a Minister, then why shouldn’t backbenchers also have a second role, as long as it does not directly infringe on their role as an MP?
If we take the example of many on the Government benches currently – are we all happy that there are a large number of MPs – and Ministers – in this Parliament who have never had an ‘outside politics’ job, and hence know nothing of the outside world beyond Oxbridge (or granted occasionally other universities), a Think Tank, research assistant to a Labour MP or as a political or union organiser?
Surely we would want the make-up of all the political parties and the whole of the House of Commons to be a bit more representative of the real world. Hence, any MP who has outside interests should be welcomed rather than castigated.
Doug West asks: “What is the candidate’s party policy on concessionary bus travel for the over-60s?”
I would like to see greater freedom of travel for the retired over 60s but this has to be wholly, or at least majorly, funded by the grant made available by central government.
The Freedom Pass scheme created by the Conservative Mayor for London is one of the most comprehensive concessionary fares schemes of its kind for older and disabled people in the country and one that would be a tremendous help to pensioners in Lincoln and Lincolnshire if it could be replicated in our County and across the Country.
Will Armstrong asks: “If you could be any cabinet minister, which one would you be and why?”
I am well aware that there are many able Conservative MPs already in Parliament, and I am hopeful that later this year I will be one of many other talented MPs to join them. Of course if I were the Cabinet Minister with the remit of Transport I would hope to steer the Department to providing benefits in the Transport system for Lincoln and Lincolnshire and the wider region, much like Hull enjoys a direct rail service to London courtesy in no small way to the former Labour Deputy Prime Minister being a Member representing Hull.
But I will be pre-occupied initially, if I am lucky enough to be elected, to ensure I am returned for a second term as the MP for Lincoln. Only by continuing as an MP for Lincoln will I be able to put Lincoln first, and if able, perhaps progress up the ranks in Westminster.
Seb Thomas asks: “There are plans in place for an eastern bypass but I don’t think this will solve the nightmare that is Lincoln’s road network. How will you try and make sure the city gets its fair share of funding and its infrastructure can be radically improved?”
I believe that one of the roles of an MP is to adopt an overarching approach to difficult issues such as the transport network and to ensure that their Constituency receives their fair share of funding. Our City’s transport infrastructure should be radically improved and new initiatives such as park and ride/sail considered.
Other ideas I have discussed with various parties include improvements to the western bypass and the current roundabout structures plus the A15 and other major routes. I have also previously made known my incredulity that any eastern bypass would have roundabout junctions rather than flyovers or underpasses and that it would not be extended to join the A46.
Abdul Majid asks: “The Public and Commercial Services Union is concerned over further privatisation of the civil service. Where do you stand on privatising public services?”
I am not against privatisation in sectors of the economy where it is appropriate. In certain geographic areas, the economies of scale of amalgamating and privatising a public service can produce vast benefits in terms of level of service as well as economic savings.
An angry Mr. Karl McCartney, Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Lincoln, has hit out at the Lincolnshire Echo over edits that were made to his responses to questions poised by readers last week.
It is understood that Mr. McCartney is in discussion with the papers editorial team.
Reproduced below are the answers Mr. McCartney issued to the paper. Based on these answer I have revised Mr. McCartney score to 8/10 pegging him with the emolient answers given by Ms Merron.
Jonathan Holmes asks: “As a student, I am struggling to survive on the financial support available. Would any of you support a proposed rise in tuition fees at a time when many people are struggling to afford university in the first place?”
As a Conservative, I believe every person who could benefit from a university education should have the opportunity to do so if they wish.
But the proportion of young people going to university has scarcely changed in the last eight years. At the current rate, it would take Labour over a century to meet their 50 per cent target. Aiming for such numbers has already had an adverse effect on standards within universities. Anyone can recognise higher fees have brought benefits to universities but we need to ensure they are providing a better student experience in return. The Conservative Party has called on the Labour Government to start a full review of the higher education sector and tuition fees now, not in two years time. But it is only right that those who benefit from higher education should meet some of the cost of their degree.
Keith Bean asks: “What is your position on fox hunting? Are you for or against?”
I am very aware the current Labour MP for Lincoln is proud of the 700 hours of parliamentary time and the expense her and her Labour Party have spent in Government coming up with this flawed law. It may be a priority for her and her party but there are more important issues for the people of Lincoln, and our nation in these difficult times.
Not one fox has been saved by their legislation – it is bad legislation and should be repealed. There are much more important issues that any Government has the duty to deal with. It’s not an issue that pre-occupies those in Lincoln who have lost jobs; who serve or have families in the armed forces; who worry about the levels of service our NHS will be able to offer in Lincolnshire, who want the best for their children and see so many children leaving Lincoln every morning to be educated.
Mr P Rives asks: “Past articles in the Echo have said heavy rail freight is to be diverted through Lincoln. The High Street will have to be closed to traffic and even pedestrians must use a bridge or an underpass. If elected will the candidates oppose this madness by every means possible?”
As one of the many residents of Lincoln who has been held up on countless occasions by the rail barriers, I would of course want to minimise the delays caused by freight trains travelling through the city centre during the day.
I also realise the whole transport system in Lincoln is seriously overloaded. However, being realistic, Network Rail as an operator of the track and infrastructure of the railways unfortunately has carte blanche to do what it likes.
A re-instated footbridge would of course be helpful, especially as the road underpass/subway at the junction of Wigford Way, St. Mary’s Street and High Street often floods and is then closed to pedestrians. That would imply any rail underpass would suffer the same.
Whoever Lincoln’s MP is, they need to work with council and business leaders in the county to help solve the problematic rail, road and other transport infrastructure issues that beset Lincoln and Lincolnshire.
Penny Kemp asks: “Would you vote to get rid of the minimum wage?”
Having experienced working at the lower end of the economic scale in my teenage years and early 20s, I am pleased many workers of all ages in similar situations are no longer taken advantage of.
However, this Labour Government’s record is woefully poor and disheartening. Figures from early 2009 show the number of people paid less than the minimum wage has doubled from 248,000 in 2005 to 445,000 in 2008.
Dave Hansell asks: “Do you think MPs should be allowed to have second jobs?”
Yes I do for many reasons. If you stop MPs from having second jobs, then who would run the Government machine? If any MP is good enough to be able to perform their duties as a constituency MP, and also be a part of the Governmental system as a Minister, then why shouldn’t backbenchers also have a second role, as long as it does not directly infringe on their role as an MP?
If we take the example of many on the Government benches currently – are we all happy that there are a large number of MPs – and Ministers – in this Parliament who have never had an ‘outside politics’ job, and hence know nothing of the outside world beyond Oxbridge (or granted occasionally other universities), a Think Tank, research assistant to a Labour MP or as a political or union organiser?
Surely we would want the make-up of all the political parties and the whole of the House of Commons to be a bit more representative of the real world. Hence, any MP who has outside interests should be welcomed rather than castigated.
Doug West asks: “What is the candidate’s party policy on concessionary bus travel for the over-60s?”
I would like to see greater freedom of travel for the retired over 60s but this has to be wholly, or at least majorly, funded by the grant made available by central government.
The Freedom Pass scheme created by the Conservative Mayor for London is one of the most comprehensive concessionary fares schemes of its kind for older and disabled people in the country and one that would be a tremendous help to pensioners in Lincoln and Lincolnshire if it could be replicated in our County and across the Country.
Will Armstrong asks: “If you could be any cabinet minister, which one would you be and why?”
I am well aware that there are many able Conservative MPs already in Parliament, and I am hopeful that later this year I will be one of many other talented MPs to join them. Of course if I were the Cabinet Minister with the remit of Transport I would hope to steer the Department to providing benefits in the Transport system for Lincoln and Lincolnshire and the wider region, much like Hull enjoys a direct rail service to London courtesy in no small way to the former Labour Deputy Prime Minister being a Member representing Hull.
But I will be pre-occupied initially, if I am lucky enough to be elected, to ensure I am returned for a second term as the MP for Lincoln. Only by continuing as an MP for Lincoln will I be able to put Lincoln first, and if able, perhaps progress up the ranks in Westminster.
Seb Thomas asks: “There are plans in place for an eastern bypass but I don’t think this will solve the nightmare that is Lincoln’s road network. How will you try and make sure the city gets its fair share of funding and its infrastructure can be radically improved?”
I believe that one of the roles of an MP is to adopt an overarching approach to difficult issues such as the transport network and to ensure that their Constituency receives their fair share of funding. Our City’s transport infrastructure should be radically improved and new initiatives such as park and ride/sail considered.
Other ideas I have discussed with various parties include improvements to the western bypass and the current roundabout structures plus the A15 and other major routes. I have also previously made known my incredulity that any eastern bypass would have roundabout junctions rather than flyovers or underpasses and that it would not be extended to join the A46.
Abdul Majid asks: “The Public and Commercial Services Union is concerned over further privatisation of the civil service. Where do you stand on privatising public services?”
I am not against privatisation in sectors of the economy where it is appropriate. In certain geographic areas, the economies of scale of amalgamating and privatising a public service can produce vast benefits in terms of level of service as well as economic savings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)