My comments after Hollande and Cameron disagree on EU reform

Posted on February 10, 2014 by rogeroffice

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to My comments after Hollande and Cameron disagree on EU reform

  1. Maureen Gannon says:
    February 10, 2014 at 11:11 pm

    What about the directive EU natura 2007 Roger , ???

    Reply
    • Roger Helmer MEP says:
      February 11, 2014 at 6:47 am

      OK Maureen — see above — but we do have to talk about other issues as well! William Dartmouth, who represents the Southwest, was talking about the impact of EU regulation on water management in the Somerset levels months ago, long before the latest floods.

      Reply
    • Flyinthesky says:
      February 11, 2014 at 1:01 pm

      I have just watched a video of the sunday politics south west show, on mentioning the eu component William Dartmouth was derided by the presenter. Apart from the Express there seems to be a consensus within the British media to avoid any reference to eu involvement in any ongoing occurrence.

      Reply
  2. Jane Davies says:
    February 10, 2014 at 11:24 pm

    What an idiot Cameron is….there is no cure for stupid! Just goes to prove a very expensive public school education is no guarantee of intelligence.

    Reply
    • David says:
      February 11, 2014 at 9:05 am

      I believe I heard the TV report correctly, that the Cams house had a power failure, and the suppliers sent 2 engineers through very bad weather and found that the Circuit breakers simply needed resetting, a flick of a switch, yet our leader ( he aint my leader) did not know to do this or did not know HOW to do this.

      Reply
      • Jane Davies says:
        February 11, 2014 at 3:57 pm

        No surprise there then…where as we have to resort to problem solving by necessity (in order to save hard earned cash) he was brought up to pick up the phone and ‘get a man in’.

  3. Mike Spilligan says:
    February 11, 2014 at 6:21 am

    Cameron knows what he’s been saying and he knows there’s no possibility of that happening with a positive (for the UK) result. The EU will wriggle and introduce further hurdles for us to jump, and in any case we will find ourselves in a minority of 27 vs. 1 on most individual issues. Cameron’s priority is now to find an important job, preferably in Brussels as a reward for delaying the UK exit.
    I was surprised at F-W Steinmeier’s view of UKIP – own up now, Mr Helmer – where are we hiding our 200 Party-owned tanks?

    Reply
  4. David says:
    February 11, 2014 at 12:17 pm

    Well said Roger, fully support your stance on this. He is wasting time & money on this, our money.

    Reply
  5. Maureen Gannon says:
    February 11, 2014 at 2:49 pm

    For catalan
    The elephant in the room is EU Directive 2007/60/EC

    Reply
    • catalanbrian says:
      February 11, 2014 at 3:56 pm

      Er – what? That directive essentially requires governments to assess flood risks and then to draw up plans for flood prevention if this is deemed necessary. If you are referring to the suggestion in the directive that governments should pay attention to natural flood risk management it seems to me that this is a highly sensible approach to a significant problem. If successive UK governments have decided to not deal with this matter properly that is where the blame lies, not with the EU.

      Reply
  6. Flyinthesky says:
    February 11, 2014 at 3:46 pm

    Catalanbrian,
    Nobody is saying the “cause” of the flood is the eu but the irrefutable is if the EA had not adopted the eu directive and continued with the the dredging and ditch clearing the flooding would have been much less and persisted for a much shorter time. The problem with your perspective, defend and believe, is it’s easily deconstructed by people who evaluate.
    The eu has achieved many things for the common good and many things for the common detriment, all at a price, but I contest it hasn’t achieved anything that couldn’t have been done cheaper and in a more timely fashion buy individual nations.
    As a concept the eu is a good idea however it’s 90% too great in scope and 99% run by the wrong people.

    Reply
    • catalanbrian says:
      February 11, 2014 at 3:59 pm

      The EU directive did not require the UK government to stop dredging. The UK government and the various UK authorities associated with flood protection made that decision, presumably to save money so that they could bribe the electorate with lower taxes.

      Reply
      • Flyinthesky says:
        February 11, 2014 at 6:18 pm

        The EA’s strategy has been driven at every point by its wish to conform with the laws and ideology of the EU – right down to the thickets of bureaucracy that make it virtually impossible, under EU waste rules, to dispose sensibly of the silt dug by locally managed drainage boards from the 1,000 miles of ditches designed to keep the Levels dry.

        The salient point here is why the eu have any influence at all in matters domestic, albeit that the last labour administration chose to interpret the directives in their most financially expedient way and the conservative party fare no better.
        We signed what was to all intents a free trade agreement in 1972, where does flood control, land fill directives et al fit with a trade agreement?

        We used to, and should, be able to hold our government accountable on all issues domestic, without giving them an excuse to pass the buck “It’s an eu directive” It was a state formerly known as democracy, remember it. Beyond the realms of vested interest sycophants the eu doesn’t do democracy.

        A couple of quotes so you know what we’re up agaist:

        “Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals we dare not present to them directly.. All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and diguised” Valery Giscard D’Estang. on the lisbon treaty.

        “If you tell a lie big (and it was a whopper) enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels.

        Sorry Roger Bit of a rant. I’ll try not to do it again.

Leave a reply to Jane Davies Cancel reply