Talk of a Canadian election set me thinking. . .
Quote:
A Conservative MEP reacted with dismay today to the news that the European Commission is to revive a plan to scrap the famous Red Ensign - despite Conservative MEPs leading a successful campaign in the European Parliament against the idea two years ago.
Geoffrey Van Orden MEP, whose East of England constituency covers a number of significant UK ports, said the latest Commission maritime safety recommendations make clear that the development of 'a European flag' on all EU merchant shipping flags would, in the Commission's view, help recognition at sea of vessels meeting the strictest European and international safety standards.
The Commission stated that its objective was "to require member states to thoroughly check that ships flying their flags comply with international standards, and therefore to have a maritime administration which strictly applies the quality criteria. Stepping up responsibility in this way is the precursor to the future development of a European flag."
Mr Van Orden accused the Commission of trying to sneak the proposal in 'by the back door'.
He said:
"Conservative MEPs led the campaign against this barmy idea the last time it was put forward two years ago. We succeeded then but I suppose we should not be surprised that the Commission is resurrecting its plans under a new guise, given past form.
"We want our ships to fly our national flag. Nothing is more recognisable at sea than the Red Ensign. The idea of flying an EU flag is offensive and defies common sense and centuries of tradition.
"The Red Ensign has always symbolised the highest safety standards. Our merchant fleet is the envy of the EU."
|
And, it gets "better". . . . . . . . . . . .
Quote:
More serious was the Commission’s power grab which removes our right as a Nation to decide what constitutes a crime. They are creating a body of EU law and will force Member States to punish offenders. If Member States do not comply they will be hauled before the ECJ.
The result of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) judgement (C-176/03) of 13th September over the question of the EU´s authority in cases of breaches of EU environmental law has initially been extended into seven new areas but, chillingly, the Commission has said that it can create criminal penalties to enforce the entire body of EU law with the support of the Council and Parliament. What is new in this development is not so much the taking of power, they have done that for years, but now with this decision the power grab is being formalised and clarified.
A Judicial coup d’état: Gerard Batten on Tuesday Evening in the Parliament:
"Not since the time of Henry VIII," he told the Assembly, "has any power, other than the British Crown, possessed the right to create criminal offences in Britain, and set penalties for breaking them." He went on:
"The Commission has ruthlessly exploited the decision of the court in order to publish a list of nine new areas of competence, which gives it the right to create new laws and impose criminal penalties. It has also stated its intention to extend its power to create further criminal offences. When this case first went to the court, 11 of the then 15 Member States opposed it; the court ignored them. A Commission lawyer has stated that it could compel the British Government – and the British Parliament – to punish its citizens for something that was not a criminal offence in Britain. If a British government were to refuse to implement these criminal offences, then it could be taken to the European Court of Justice, which would compel it to do so. The court would then act as judge and jury in its own case. So much for the separation of powers of the executive, legislative and judiciary that has protected English freedoms for centuries!
The decision by the so-called European Court of Justice is nothing less than a judicial coup d’état. The Court has seized power from the Member States and handed it to the Commission"
|
R.
(English citizen and subject of HM QEII)