Sold out to the over-reaching EU. Again.

I’ve been meaning to write a comprehensive post on the powers over matters of justice that we have handed over to the EU, including the European Arrest Warrant. Well, I say comprehensive, but I’m not a lawyer. I was just going to borrow extensively from excellent law blogger ObiterJ.

For a decent insight, read his posts:

    The evidence of the last Labour government selling the British people out is as comprehensive as it is frightening and infuriating.
    So this immediately caught my attention:

image

Anger at Britain’s “gold-plating” of the controversial European Arrest Warrant is growing after it emerged that other EU countries have secured significant safeguards for their citizens that are not available to British nationals.

Although the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) was intended to operate in the same way in all 27 EU states, The Sunday Telegraph has established that many other European countries have given themselves “opt-outs” or conditions to protect their citizens.

It comes after this newspaper first highlighted concerns last week over the way that the warrant system was being used in Britain.

Holland will not extradite Dutch nationals under the EAW unless the accusing state agrees that they can serve any prison sentence in a Dutch jail. The Belgians have opt-outs so that the warrant does not cover abortion.

Abortion and “abetting abortion” are crimes in some EU states, including Malta, Ireland and Poland – Europe’s most active issuer of EAWs.

Birth control campaigners fear they could be targeted by antiabortionists under the EAW, even simply for running a British-based advice website accessible from abroad.

France appears reluctant to extradite its own nationals under the EAW and has stated in the past that they will not be extradited.

Europe’s largest country, Germany, has imposed a “proportionality rule” stating that only those accused of serious crimes can be seized under a warrant. The definition of serious is not given, but it would exclude large numbers of the trivial charges dealt with by the British extradition courts.

One Kent motorist, Patrick Reece-Edwards, spent weeks in a British jail awaiting extradition to Poland on a charge of possessing a forged motor insurance certificate. When he was finally extradited, the matter was resolved by the payment of a civil penalty with no criminal record.

So many people – mostly Poles – are extradited from Britain to Poland on minor charges that special fortnightly military flights are operated for them from a London airfield. The hundreds of trivial requests are also a serious drain on police, prison and court resources.

Britain has no such opt-outs, and campaigners say that British judges are too cautious in applying the overriding requirements of the Human Rights Act.

Karen Todner, one of Britain’s leading extradition lawyers, said: “It is typical of us not to have given ourselves proper protection.

“British judges apply the EAW treaty to the letter and these massive injustices come about because the Government hasn’t thought this through.

“There are a lot of quite simple things we could do now to mitigate the harm done to British citizens, which could be done quite quickly through a simple administrative decision.”

British citizens sent abroad under the EAW are also at a serious disadvantage. Since foreigners are regarded as flight risks, bail is often refused and pretrial detention, even for minor crimes, can last for years.

I really don’t know where to begin.

What on Earth could those responsible for this situation have been thinking? Were they negligent, incompetent, acting out of complete disregard for people or what?

The ConDems say they’re looking at our extradition arrangements, but I very much doubt they have the will or the ability to right this massive and self-evident wrong that was yet another fantastic bequest from Labour. Perhaps more to the point, the same civil servants who lovingly gold-plated the whole thing in the first place are now, presumably, in charge of reviewing the arrangements.

Blunkett, who first signed off the EAW is unruffled about the perverse outcomes:

Mr Blunkett said: “I was right, as Home Secretary in the post-9/11 era, to agree to the European Arrest Warrant, but I was insufficiently sensitive to how it might be used.”.

This is just another reason why I just loathe Labour, and every single one of their supporters, for what they have done to the country I was born in.

I’ve already written to my MP about this, and as soon as Parliament is back in session, I’ll be hounding him for a response.

Do the same, make some fucking noise.

AJ

UPDATE: I wonder why I fucking bother, when DK comes along to remind us why he’s a leading libertarian blogger & I’m a useless cunt with copy & paste buttons.

Required listening

If you want to hear the BBC’s Europhile cock-gobblers eating some humble pie, listen to Radio 4 at 20:00 on Tuesday 24th August.

image

The Euro is in deep trouble.

As the project intended to unify the European Union causes even deeper divisions, questions are being raised about whether nations as diverse as Germany and Greece can really share the same currency.

The repercussions spread far beyond mainland Europe. Britain is affected as British firms struggle to sell to the Eurozone.

Jonathan Charles was the BBC’s Europe correspondent in the 1990s, when the euro was first introduced to great fanfare. He travelled widely around the continent, reporting on the years of preparations leading to the final launch of the euro.

Now he retraces his steps, returning to some of those places and speaking to the likes of former Chancellor of the Exchequer Norman Lamont, the UK’s treasury minister and ambassador at the time, and prominent European figures including the former Dutch Prime Minister Wim Kok and some top European bankers. Jonathan also talks to ordinary workers whose livelihood has been fundamentally changed by the advent of euro zone.

Having taken Europe’s temperature, Jonathan asks if the Euro will survive, and what does it mean for Europe’s dream of political integration?

Suck it up, socialist monkeys. The Euro is in collapse and the EU won’t be far behind it.

AJ

The result is in: ConDemFail

16th July:

image

My fingers were crossed for a triumph of hope over experience.

Today:

image

Theresa May, the Home Secretary, will today announce she plans to sign up to the so-called European Investigation Order (EIO), The Daily Telegraph understands.

That’s it, then. The honeymoon is absolutely 100% over.

Liberties endangered, powers given away to the EU, without a referendum.

Slow hand clap for Cameron and May, everybody.

AJ

Smaller government, less regulation, more freedom.

Not.

Department of Energy and Climate Change confirmed that the Government was considering a variable stamp duty rate to encourage people to green up their homes.

‘There are many incentives that we are considering to tackle home efficiency. No final decision has been made, but we are considering it,’ a spokesman said.

Since 2008 all homes put up for sale have had an energy performance certificate, which ranks them on a scale from A for the best, to G for the least efficient.

To avoid paying the higher stamp duty, a home would need to be upgraded to at least a band E.

Ah yes, because when the home information packs were ‘scrapped’, there was still something stuck to our shoe. The Energy Performance Certificate, which is mandated by the EU.

The proposals would be introduced alongside the Government’s Green Deal – a £90 billion scheme to cut the fuel bills of 14 million homes.

Under the Green Deal, householders will be offered "free" green makeovers by energy companies, local councils or DIY chains from 2012.

Free’? Ah – as in more freedom? Oh..

The money spent on new insulation, double glazing or replacement boilers will be claimed back from the savings made in energy bills.

The Government says the green makeovers are essential if the UK is to meet its legally binding targets of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 34 per cent of their 1990 levels within 10 years.

Ah yes. Greenhouse gases. The science isn’t settled there, even.

Why do physicists keep silent? Because the greenhouse-effect is based on backradiation and to understand that backradiation is unphysical, requires understanding the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. But the 2nd Law is a mystery to modern physicists and thus a modern physicist cannot say what should be said, namely that backradiation violates the 2nd Law and thus the greenhouse-effect is fiction.

Of course, such thought could be outlawed as a heresy by the EU*.

Or, it could just be outlawed in one EU country, that could then seek to arrest and extradite people who publish skeptical blogs elsewhere in Europe where no such offence exists.

FFS.

AJ

* This is a link to the BNP website. I don’t accept that it can be dismissed solely on that basis.

Big test approaching for the ConDems

If this goes ahead, we’ll know immediately that this government needs to be fought relentlessly until it is defeated.

image

The proposed power would allow officers from an EU country to demand information on anyone they suspect of an offence, no matter how minor or whether it is even criminal in the UK.

The directive would see UK police almost powerless to prevent the handing over of personal details such as DNA, bank account or even telephone records.

Fair Trials International (FTI) said it could result in disproportionate requests, such as demands for the DNA of plane loads of British holidaymakers following a murder in their resort.

It could also see British officers chasing crimes that are not even covered by UK law such as criminal defamation.

The EIO is designed to help law enforcement agencies in EU states share information better and be more effective in combating cross border crime.

But campaigners fear it grants significantly wider powers to foreign officers and will lead to a substantial increase in requests.

Dominic Raab, Tory MP for Esher and Walton, who raised the issue in the House of Commons yesterday, said: “Britain should not opt into this half-baked measure.

“It would allow European police to order British officers to embark on wild-goose chases.

“It would force our police to hand over personal information on British citizens, even if they are not suspects and the conduct under investigation is not a crime in this country.

“And it gives foreign police law enforcement authority on British soil.

“The Order won’t help tackle crime – it will waste police time and ditch safeguards that UK citizens expect from the British justice system.”

The Home Office has until July 28 to decide whether to opt in to the order or not.

So in two weeks time, we will know precisely where we stand regarding not just civil liberties, but regarding Dave’s promise of a referendum before handing more powers to the EU.

Oh – just one bit of dissonance to share with you from that story:

Some senior Tories are understood to be concerned about it but Whitehall sources suggested the Liberal Democrat members of the Coalition are more supportive.

Hmmm…

AJ

Silver linings

My opinion diverges from that of Big Brother Watch on the matter of the EU’s attempts to ban the ‘mosquito’.

image

Sure, you can argues that these devices are evil, misanthropic and insidious. And they are.

But there are two much wider and more important observations to be made.

The UK government has rejected calls to ban a device that uses a high-pitched noise to disperse teenage gangs.

A non-kneejerk reaction contrary to the bansturbators. Good.

A report for the Council of Europe last week called for a ban, suggesting its use may breach human rights law.

Refusing to bend over for the Euronumpties. Good.

You want to name and shame organisations that use these things? Have at it.

You want to lobby and campaign against their use on whatever grounds you find? Fair play.

Persuade, negotiate, shame if you have to, but banning stuff? Forget it, statist imbeciles.

AJ

Dave Quixote and the Windmills of Europe

I smelled a rat when I read this:

image

What are we vetoing, Dave? A new treaty? An amendment to Lisbon? Ah. No.

Despite Dave’s determination to give it star billing, however, Merkel was at pains to play down the idea of a new treaty, stressing that it was "early days" as yet, to be considering such changes. This low-key approach was echoed by yesterday’s meeting of a "taskforce" of EU finance ministers under the chairmanship of EU council president Herman Van Rompuy.

French finance minister Christine Lagarde suggested forgetting about the treaty and concentrating on the "deliverables", while her German counterpart, Wolfgang Schaeuble, advised his colleagues to do what could be done without treaty changes and then to examine the options. Nobody was proposing any treaty changes in the short-term, said Van Rompuy.

In the meantime, Richard North also reveals that:

That didn’t stop little Georgie Osborne laying down the law to the colleagues about disclosure of "national budget plans" and the need for elected members of the House of Commons to be told about them first. Given that budgets are now routinely cleared with the Commission before they are publically announced, this reinforced the growing conviction that little Georgie really is as stupid as he looks.

No-one’s fooled.

For the time being, though, the "tough talking" is playing well enough to the gallery, sufficient at any rate to blur the details of last Wednesday’s humiliation, when Osborne was obliged to accept the new rules on hedge funds, without even the opportunity to address the council meeting.

It certainly allows "Call me Dave" to tell his faithful that he is protecting the national interest, and some of them are still gullible enough to believe him … the great "eurosceptic" who is really "engaging" with Europe and telling them what’s what.

And we haven’t even gotten into things the Eurozone countries can do, that Dave can’t stop, even though they’ll cost us money.

AJ

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 26 other followers

%d bloggers like this: