Europe and You

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Europe and You

  1. tapestry says:

    Europe messes up national tyre safety regulation, air quality, trading standards and everything else. Then declares itself the natural solution to the troubles created by itself. Tens of thousands are dying, thanks to the good old EU.

  2. Ian Terry says:

    You are so right tapestry but is not their big plan? The problems man is facing is due to too many people, so if they can reduce the numbers legally then they will be full of their own praise as the drop in numbers increases their percieved achievements.

  3. barrymx5 says:

    Well done Roger to highlight how damaging the so-called Green lobby has been. It is Ill informed and dangerous.

  4. Flyinthesky says:

    29,000 deaths attributable to air pollution, it’s a classic case, again, it isn’t what “is” it’s what they want it to be. Like smoking tobacco, if you happened to smoke it will be annotated on the death certificate as probable cause.
    You did well to hold your own against near insurmountable odds, it’s obvious to me that the interviewer has got it bad and is terminally on message, the other has vested interest, his own.
    What isn’t expressed is the principal cause, standing traffic, brought about by TPTBs desire to be in control of everything. Fluidly moving traffic contributes little to the pollution footprint, if they were serious about reducing pollution the impetus would be to facilitate traffic not hamper it at every opportunity.
    We have situations that every new set of traffic lights have to have a crossing facility, distorting the sequence and leaving traffic standing for minutes. If anyone did a study, not going to happen, on the wasted fuel and pollution generated by this phenomena the results would be mind boggling.
    My nearest city’s has a traffic planner who is a self declared cycle riding motorphobe and doesn’t even live there.
    If you wish to reduce pollution the way forward is to facilltate moror vehicles not control them.
    A lot of the demise of city centres is down to the outlawing and constricting of vehicular transport.

  5. Flyinthesky says:

    It’s in the same vein as unit alcohol consumption, a position, years later ,it was figures plucked from thin air. No scientific basis whatsoever. The govenment position is make a case for it, control it, and monetise it. It’s as far through as a drink of water.London doesn’t want to reduce traffic it wants to further monetise it. Congestion, first create the problem, then pose yourself as the solution to it, with financial rewards of course. The eu has been using this business model, create the problem and pose yourself as the only solution, for decades. Anyone who votes for the legacy parties is assuring the phenomenons’ continuance.

  6. omanuel says:

    Thanks, Roger, for having the courage to tell the public the truth.

    Some very brave soul at Goddard risked their lucrative professional career to show the public the real danger of living @ 1 AU from a pulsar-centered star:

    http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/12/06/voodoo-at-ncdc/#comment-466605

  7. omanuel says:

    Bob Livingston has a related blog on “The Evolution of Tyranny.”

    http://personalliberty.com/republicanism-tyranny-lose-rights/

  8. leosco says:

    If traffic pollution is the problem, then the remedy is to make cars travel at a higher constant average speed instead of slowing it down with obstacles on the road like speed humps, chicanes and rumble strips, because when a vehicle is constantly changing up and down through the gears at comparatively low speeds exhaust emissions can double within the speed controlled area, then of course there is the structural damage such street furniture can do to steering, suspension and tyres, which may after prolonged exposure to these damaging road environments render a percentage of vehicles in roadworthy and pose a risk to other road users.

  9. Ex-expat Colin says:

    The population in London (for one) is too large for its infrastructure I think. Has been for a very long time. A TV programme last night (5* channel) stated that 29 Million vehicles enter London each day (29M out?). No wonder diesel etc is a problem in such places. An indication is the constant jam between the M3 and M4 junctions on the M25. That rat run will add about an hour of crawling to your journey every day. Then experience the long nausea queuing both sides of the M25 at the Dartford toll crossing. Add in road works/incidents and journeys increase by up to 2 hours..mine do from Shropshire. I now journey after 10pm. PL registered vehicles abound, all day.

    The MOT deals with tyres…well, maybe not, as its used to be the case a spare tyre was not checked for, which I always thought was dumb. MOT doesn’t deal with foreign vehicles though. Spain per 2 years?

    Belgium is a mess..always was. Suddenly they get the big Brussels build.

    The problem with the hand wringers (all varieties) is that they are interfering in the major systems of our countries. Energy, Tax, Immigration, Devo, Separation and so on. Thats all apart from the wars we foolishly get dragged into. And the inexperienced fools who get elected follow through on the pressure applied (lobbying). 5, perhaps 10 years in, and then out with a pile of money taken from tax payers at gun point. Now we suffer Blair, Brown and Major wandering around the world re arranging the furniture as required. Achieving little other than filling their boots.

    The awkward protests of the greens over the early years now have a formal platform – the EU, so the likes of the lawyer(?) in the film above should be no surprise..Mr Concerned? I note the WWF still after their £3 pm (TV daily – 5pm) for polar bears in exchange for a junk cuddly toy…made in China no doubt!

    Obama got to deal with elephant ivory suddenly…..dumb stuff from UK – again. Its not about people (human beings) is it?

    • Brin Jenkins says:

      In the USA they don’t bother with any MOT. I was horrified and asked are there not many accidents with unsafe motors? Well it seems not, the police patrol their roads, and should you be pulled over your vehicle will be checked, and any infringements or violations might see you lose your number plate on the spot. This is also your driving license so you’re grounded with recovery, repair, or car crushing expenses imminent.

      They are not overrun with accidents caused by lack of any MOT, I ask therefore just how cost effective is our MOT industry?

    • Flyinthesky says:

      The difference with Spain is their mot (itv) is conducted by the government not vested interest private enterprise. There are no repair facillities on site so the MOT test is based on condition and safety issues not earning opportunity.
      Tyres are a peculiar phenomenon, their condition is greatly influenced by their history of sun exposure as UV exposure over time embrittles rubber. Tyre tread depth is another vested interest inspired standard, the optimal minimum is lobbied for and set by vested interests. If you look at a modern motorcycle tyre, perfomance in wet weather critical, it has virtually no tread pattern at all. It isn’t about treads it’s about compound formulations.

      • Flyinthesky says:

        These things are a continual manifestation of a phenomenon.
        Government ministers are not appointed primarily on area exertise, as they should be, they are appointed on the potential to tow tthe government line. Miniserial positions are a sad joke on all of us, they don’t represent wisdom and analitics, they are incumbent to promote the governments position.

        A fine and recent example would be Owen Paterson, a man on top of his brief, in most areas, but he knew too much about the subject and had to be dispensed with in short order. They do not countenace off message.

        Roger seems to be well informed as to his brief but he has to be mindful that if he achieves office there will be a rake of civil servants ready to tell him why his common sense positions cannot be implemented, they’re not protecting our position at all, they’re protecting their own. Money has changed hands, empires have been built. They’re not going to concede easily or gracefully.

        The bottom line is although we notionally change the controlling party we do not change the actual government. I hope UKIP can realise this and address it.

      • Brin Jenkins says:

        Yes Minister explained rather a lot.

  10. David says:

    Always money for restrictions, ie speed bumps, led speed warning signs, non for potholes.

    Dear Gov. please transfer funds from speed bumps to potholes.

    • Brin Jenkins says:

      Great idea David, just shovel the bump into an appropriate hole. It’s hardly rocket science but it seems beyond their real World pay grade.

      • David says:

        Ill give all the folks reading this an example, Some badly filled utility trenches running across the width of a minor country road had subsided about 2 inches, much like long potholes across the flow of traffic, so I reported to Bradford Metro, who fixed them so well the repairs now protrude about 2 inches. Result!
        You have to laugh

  11. David says:

    I keep hoping, and raising this at UKIP local meets to smiles and nods of approval, maybe the NEC will latch on to this idea. Include it in the UKIP manifesto.
    As for our gov adpoting the idea, no, they dont get “common sense”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s