Friday, 6 June 2014

The great EU parliament illusion

I wasn't sure whether to put this under information or fraud as it's really both, but everyone needs to know what those phenomenally well-paid members of the EU parliament can actually do. Now here is the official 2014 definition, bearing in mind it includes the phrase these powers are far greater than they were originally- imagine how little they could do before:

"The European Parliament has been steadily gaining power over recent decades and now acts as a co-legislator for nearly all EU law. Together with the Council, the Parliament adopts or amends proposals from the Commission. Parliament also supervises the work of the Commission and adopts the European Union's budget. See how it all works here.
Beyond these official powers the Parliament also works closely with national parliaments of EU countries. Regular joint parliamentary assemblies allow for a better inclusion of national perspectives into the Parliament's deliberations."

Can they make law? No. Can they initiate law to be made? No. Are the actual lawmakers elected as well? No.

Therefore calling such an expensive and large scale group a parliament (bearing in mind its common meaning of a legislative body) is a lie, a major scam and fraud, and means the EU process has to both hide behind a fake body of power which just discusses, makes minor suggestions and rubber stamps the real laws made above, mainly in secret, by the unelected civil servants of the Commission. It has less power than the House of Lords and probably a little more than the royal family, although that would be debatable as information of their actual influence is protected by the law. They can administer the budget, but that is an accounting procedure few if any voters would know how to follow let alone decide on so only a technical rather than parliamentary power, given (although it is planned) as yet they do not actually have a tax budget as countries would. They choose the commission members but cannot participate directly in their process.


Again, "However there are some differences from national legislatures; for example, neither the Parliament nor the Council have the power of legislative initiative (except for the fact that the Council has the power in some intergovernmental matters). In Community matters, this is a power uniquely reserved for the European Commission (the executive). Therefore, while Parliament can amend and reject legislation, to make a proposal for legislation, it needs the Commission to draft a bill before anything can become law"

This further implies the separation of powers, designed to avoid tyranny, has never been present in the EU administration as technically the executive must also share the powers of the legislature rather than have a genuine function and balanced scrutiny. So they are passive, and sit and wait for the random jottings and mental wanderings of the cabal to arrive before they spend as long as they feel like turning it over, possibly suggest a few changes (if it's within their power), and according to this actually reject some. Really? I will see. Meanwhile the true function is described far more accurately here by an outsider, something not referred to in their own site's definition at the start:

"The Parliament also has a great deal of indirect influence, through non-binding resolutions and committee hearings, as a "pan-European soapbox" with the ear of thousands of Brussels-based journalists."

Condensed down, it means they are a PR front to spread the word of what a great job they're doing and do their best to hide any serious policies being introduced to replace yet another national function, eg European income taxes which are their latest project. Journalists. That is the fluorescent highlighted word in the sentence. It is there to feed journalists to spread how good and really helpful the EU really is, ie they are protecting themselves and their jobs, ultimately at our loss and expense (see Greece and worse still Cyprus), especially if like Britain you are a net contributor (read 'loser').

"There is also an indirect effect on foreign policy; the Parliament must approve all development grants, including those overseas. For example, the support for post-war Iraq reconstruction, or incentives for the cessation of Iranian nuclear development, must be supported by the Parliament. Parliamentary support was also required for the transatlantic passenger data-sharing deal with the United States.[47] Finally, Parliament holds a non-binding vote on new EU treaties but cannot veto it."

A few more details on what they can spend those billions they collect from us on, which really are taxes as the £55 million a day the country pays to be in at all is taken from our taxes instead of paying doctors to work a few more hours in the evening a day. But when you ultimately take the things they can do and remove them from the main cake there's still most of that cake remaining, all those really major regulations like the green taxes and open door border policies, and rather than spend an unpaid hour or more looking I'll leave you the small task of finding any actual proposed legislation they have rejected. It shouldn't be too hard. But in the end calling something a 'parliament' which is essentially an archetypal second chamber while the actual parliamentary work your national parliament carries out is nearly all carried out by civil servants, appointed vicariously for 12 years, debate mainly in secret, and therefore carry all the requirements of a totalitarian system as the parliament is just the front for the dictators behind, like in Iran where the president changes but the Ayatollah remains regardless and runs the show.

No comments:

Post a Comment