Strasbourg Commentary Plenary Session July 1st- 4th 2013

Strasbourg Commentary Plenary Session July 1^st- 4^th 2013

Tuesday Enda Kenny, in closing the Irish Presidency, mentioned several MEPs by name, praising some, severely criticising others. A new departure, not heard before

The Commission are to spend 7 million Euros on a European Youth Event, 5000 attendees, on May 9^th ,Europe Day just before the Euro elections, to show them how wonderful it all is.

Entrance security at the event will ensure that only banners corresponding to the established criteria will be allowed into the building; what do you think that means?

Stuart Agnew reported on progress on reform of the CAP. Yes, progress of a sort, but the proposed measures will, in fact, take more land out of production! We already import a great deal of our food and the world population is growing all the time!! The revisions have been described by others as a “Dog’s breakfast”.

Caravans- ,one of 3 related reports. They did not listen, of course, to my one minute effort on Monday evening, on web site. Same problem as always. Neither the rapporteur, nor any other speaker, has any experience of towing a caravan, We are in the hands of idiots who just want to make a name for themselves, reducing road accidents in this case. Tell me, when did you last see an accident caused by a towed caravan? By the way, one of the 3 reports specified the actual size of the road worthiness documents which you might be asked to produce. Seriously, its all there, size of paper and everything.

NB the Chairrman of the committee asked for the legislative resolution of all three reports not to be put to a vote to start the legislative process, so that they can go back to committee for further work. That was adopted. So we wait and see.

Wednesday. Votes included the Financial Transaction Tax which will cripple the City of London, as intended. We were able to vote for some amendments, like the one to take Pension Funds out of the scope of the tax;- no use, out voted by 225 to 458 where UK Labour MEPs voted against. Enjoy retirement!

One of the worst features of the FTT is that unless the tax is paid the purchaser has no right to the Title. Neither has the vendor. Who has the title rights is then uncertain. A lot of pension funds change hands from one company to another!

There was also a vote on, “Timing of auctions of greenhouse gas emissions”. Here they plan to “backload” the taxes, ie not just to tax when it takes effect but to go back in time and tax previous emissions. That would be like coming back to you for the extra tax on petrol you bought a year ago when it was less! We did not vote at all, see my explanation of vote,-

“I did not vote on any of the amendments because they gave the Commission authority to exact payments either on current emissions or on earlier emissions,- backloading-, or on both. To vote either "yes" or "no" to any amendment would have endorsed the authority of the commission to extract these payments, there was no way to vote to oppose the granting of this authority.

I therefore voted "no" to the whole proposal”.

(NB. MEPs can always explain how they voted, either verbally after voting has ended, or later in writing. In any case the explanation goes on to the Parliament web site where, for controversial votes, the hordes of pressure groupers just love to see how we voted on their cause. Quite right, we are elected by the people who have the right to know how we voted.)

Double Standards You may have perhaps picked up the affair of Marine Le Pen, now leader of the National Front. She objected to two streets in Paris being taken over by Muslims praying, since France is a secular country and the roads belong to everyone. She was threatened with prosecution but relied on her Parliamentary Immunity. As a result there was a move to remove her immunity by way of a vote in Parliament. We, including myself, voted against this, but were outvoted and she lost.

A while ago an MEP in home state broke a traffic law while not on Parliament business, assaulted a policeman and was arrested. MEPs voted to preserve his immunity.They like double standards here, hence the comment in the press release;-

A UKIP spokesman said:

"We voted to keep her immunity because we believe that freedom of speech is sacrosanct.

She made her comments in pursuance of her work as an elected politician. There was no fraud or incitement to hatred involved.

There should be one rule for all, immunity should not be lifted just because you don't like the MEP's politics."

The Labour Party was accused of "craven dishonesty" for voting against a UKIP amendment in the European Parliament today to return unspent money to national budgets.

UKIP MEP William Dartmouth placed two amendments to a Motion for Resolution on the EU 2014-20120 Budget (MFF)

It called for "unspent money at the end of each year cannot be transferred to the following year but must be returned to national budgets;"

UKIP MEPs as well as the Tories voted in favour of the amendment,

Labour and LibDem MEPs voted to reject it.

Also a vote today on the state of democracy in Hungary. It is alleged that the government is ultra right wing and needs “correction”, with lots of emails contradicting this view. Interestingly this report was very divided with the final vote being like the amendments, 370 in favour, 249 against. It is usually much more one-sided.

Thursday is usually very low key, except today, main vote on the Snowden whistle blower and USA surveillance systems. Plenty of hot under the collar stuff. Much condemnation of the US but support too. Vote of 483- 98 in favour of opposing the US.

More to our point was the Duff (MEP Eastern) report on the Euro elections of 2014. Open primaries suggested to establish candidates, (not supported), plenty of support for further items not to our liking. All of which may overwhelm our own decision taken by conference vote a year ago, not to support pan-European parties. This will come, be sure of it.

Finally, a report on an Increase in duties on Norwegian agricultural products. Mixed support for amendments but report passed. They do not like Norway, anyone like to suggest why?

Derek Clark MEP Strasbourg 4^th July 2013

Brussels Commentary Employment Committee June 19th - 20th 2013

Brussels Commentary Employment Committee June 19th - 20th 2013

Wednesday "Tackling Youth Unemployment, possible ways out". Yet again they talk about unemployment without actually putting forward concrete proposals. That's because the Euro is collapsing and European industry is losing out to other parts of the world. European goods are becoming uncompetetive.

But we did hear that people should be allowed to work away from their member state, and we certainly do not want to stop free movement! We need a European future, not a local one, while respecting the working practices of member states! Among this we were told that fewer polish people were leaving Poland and that more were returning home.

Thursday Business was scheduled for a 9.00 start followed by voting at 9.30, but the secretariat did not turn up until about 9.45 when voting started under a deputy, since the President turned up at about 11.00 am . This massive voting session finished at about 12.45 and all other business was postponed. Having arrived the President was challenged about the sequence of votes, promoting a lively exchange in which she relied on "Standing Orders". I wonder if that had caused her late arrival and that of the secretariat.

Among the reports finally voted on was that on "Gender balance among non-executive directors of companies on stock exchanges". It seeks to establish 40% of each sex on these Boards, without saying what the remaining 20% should be! The proposed plan "encourages" companies to work towards this, with perhaps government legislation, and to show that efforts are being made, with explanations given for failure. Member states could suffer infringement proceedings if there are no national rules and sanctions would only be imposed on companies if they were not seen to be trying.

Voting was dominated by the "Posting of Workers" Directive, to which there were over 600 amendments. This is intended to ensure that workers posted by their employers to work outside their own country, but within the EU, receive all the benefits that are available for workers move elsewhere on their own account. It is of course a legal minefield but that does not stop the EU from trying to make water-tight regulations to cope.

This report was only adopted by 23 votes to 18 with 6 abstentions. Such a relatively narrow result ís a reflection of this committee's uncertainty, for once. There was then further debate on what to do with it, send it on to Plenary for final approval, or enter into negotiations with the Council of Ministers to decide its future. The latter course needed a mandate to send it to Council, which, after thought, I supported, as did the committee. No doubt this will proceed to conciliation in due course; a very longwinded affair.

Derek Clark MEP Brussels, 20th June 2013.         

Strasbourg Commentary Plenary session 10 – 13 June 2013

Strasbourg Commentary Plenary session 10 – 13 June 2013

Tuesday Saw a report on “Organised crime, Corruption and Money Laundering” whereby the EU is to move in with all its bureaucracy and red tape. It is intended to set up a European Prosecutor’s Office, a training centre for intelligence agents, a standing committee and all the rest of it, with massive funds attached. No problem, Cameron got a deal on the budget did he not?

Wednesday Several reports on Border control and associated measures including Schengen. Although we are not a Schengen member it will affect us, see Gerard’s speech on the UKIP MEP’s web site, with his reply to a question from the floor. Summary of this business below,-

UKIP Press release - EU stops states acting over abuse of Schengen

For the first time, it will be possible for EU inspection teams to make unannounced visits to monitor any attempt to introduce illegal border checks at internal borders within Schengen.

New rules laying down common procedures and deadlines for handling asylum applications and basic rights for asylum seekers arriving in the EU were endorsed by Parliament on Wednesday.

Note, they don’t like the Government’s newly announced decision to police our borders more closely. How effective will that be with EU agents round their necks?

Today started with a debate, “Preparation for the European Council Meeting”, again, which included a great deal of hot air about unemployment, especially youth unemployment. Some points raised included,-

Barroso declaring again that SMEs show great deal of youth unemployment so we need to press on with the “Youth Guarantee” and we need to go on a journey for growth and jobs. At this point my apologies. I serve on the employment committee but I have no clear idea as to what the “Youth Guarantee” is. It has been mentioned several times but what exactly it is in practice I know not, in spite of listening closely to the debates in committee.

Swaboda, the Socialist leader, was disappointed with the Irish Presidency, now ending, because they failed on the budget.

Verhofstadt, Liberals, criticised Msr Hollande for saying that the crisis was over when it is not (at least that’s realism) and to cure it we cannot go on with 27 different governments and banking systems; we must have a Banking Union!!

For almost the first time today I thought that we were at Westminster for PMQs. There were a number of angry interventions starting with a Greek MEP who called a Point of Order, but turned it into a tirade about the closing down of the Greek national Radio/ TV station. He alleged that this had been done by order of the ‘Troika’ now running Greece and, “ was this Democracy?”, he asked. With 68% youth unemployment in Greece he has a right to be angry. The President, Schultz himself at that time, told him in no uncertain terms that he could not use a point of order to raise political issues, and promptly turned off the offender’s microphone.

Later on Commissioner Olli Rehn attempted to put this TV close-down into perspective. He said it had been done by the legitimate Greek Government authorities alone and recent documents endorse his statement. This was met by a round of boos and cat-calls, almost as if he was not believed!

Another MEP tried to turn a Point of Order into a political issue and he found his microphone switched off very quickly.

Perhaps the best was a woman MEP , Ms Ungureanu I think, who was mis-identified by the President. We all have a number in front of our place for identification, but there was a similarity of names. Ms “U” started to make a fuss about something. The chair had changed by then but this experienced deputy President was ready. He accused her of sitting in the wrong place deliberately, so as to make him call the wrong name and cause confusion. She got cut-off too!

And we are the Clowns!!

Thursday The last day is always light both on debates and votes because so many MEPs leave late Wednesday or mid-day Thursday. I usually start off for home late afternoon having completed the commentary but the agenda is particularly light today. Debates on Central Africa, breaches of human rights, rule of law in Russia, and so on.

I shall stay for voting at 1200 and off to the airport, I hope. There is a strike of Air traffic Controllers due to end this morning, but there will be a back-log. Indeed, will it end this morning? There is also a strike of the French railways, also due to end this morning, so change of plan dubious. My flight takes me to Brussels with change of flight to Birmingham so there is double the chance of being stranded.

Funny, these strikes always seem to occur during a Strasbourg week! They know perfectly well that there is no direct flight from/ to anywhere in the UK for Strasbourg, likewise, Ireland, Scandinavia, Italy (well, at least Rome). Travel to and from France and Germany is, naturally, easy and various, and there is a good motorway system.

Just my way of reminding all those chancing their arm with MEP selection of life’s little difficulties, EU style.

Derek Clark MEP Strasbourg 13^th June 2013.

Brussels Commentary Employment Committee May 29th - 30th 2013

Brussels Commentary Employment Committee May 29th - 30th 2013

More money for the taxpayer to find

Wednesday we voted on Regional Policy for wider State support schemes. My one vote was the solitary "No" against 36 in favour.

Thursday we voted on a Youth strategy which will cost 6 billion Euros. Did better here, my one vote against was supported by one other, as opposed to 35 in favour.

Then "crisis on access to care for the vulnerable" will cost a lot more, but no figure given!. I was down to voting against on my once more, 36 in favour.

Lastly, "social investments for growth and cohesion, implementing the European Social Fund". I got 2 to support me against 34 in favour this time.

So, in spite of Dave's stand on the budget it looks like we will end up finding more cash.

I got rather fed up in the debate on "Improving private International Law, jurisprudence rules applicable to employment". This became a matter of yet more laws to allow workers to move from one country to another without being penalised by the different employment laws they then will find. This was admitted to being a legal minefield so, instead of letting the lawyers earn their money and sort it out, they will now want to bring in a raft of laws to ensure that people can move countries and still be employed on the same legal basis. No adaptation needed.

No chance of allowing people to work to the laws they find themselves under on making a move of course. That is the thin and of the wedge, all other national laws will be "harmonised" over the course of time. Not that this will be apparent for years to come, one thing at a time, very slowly so as not to frighten the horses.

Did I hear you say, "When in Rome......"

I regret to say I did not stay long enough to hear the Employment Commissioner in an exchange of views, "in the context of the structured dialogue". What dialogue do you ask?,- quite.

Lastly, I wish you all to know that I am not seeking re-election as MEP. I will continue to work as one of your MEPs over this last year, as indeed you would expect me to.

Derek Clark MEP Brussels 30th May 2013

Strasbourg Commentary Plenary session 20 - 23 May 2013

Strasbourg Commentary Plenary session 20 - 23 May 2013

I have to tell you that things go on here much as before. There is no sign of collapse, yet, and the problems of the Euro have not surfaced, unless that happens after I have completed this edition.

However, there were debates on fraud and tax havens as well as further legislation on the EMU. Here you should see Godfrey's contribution on the UKIP MEP's website.

Tuesday Voting included a report to alter the date of the next Euro elections due next year. MEPs voted to change the dates from the first week in June to May. But this is against EU law, as explained by Stuart Agnew MEP,-

Euro election date changed to suit holidays of sun-lounging Germans.

UKIP Press Release

Tuesday 21st May 2013. Immediate.

The EU is breakings its own laws to change Euro elections from June to May next year. The law says it may be changed if to have it in June 2014 is "impossible".

The reasons advanced by EU Parliament for changing date is that it was to facilitate election of new European Commission and it clashed with German holidays.

UKIP MEP Stuart Agnew for Eastern England said,

"The EU is acting against its own laws and leaves the decision to change the date open to legal challenge in the courts. It betrays itself as a tyranny rather than an institution under the rule of law.

It is quite ridiculous that the date of the European Elections would be changed for the reasons that German holidaymakers wish to spread their beach towels on the sun lounges of the Mediterranean. But it does show the increase of arbitrary rule of the EU allied to the growing German dominance of Europe."

Ends

Stuart Agnew MEP is a member of the AFCO or Constitutional Affairs Committee of the European Parliament.

Need I say more?

A further report pokes the EU nose into Offshore Gas and Oil exploration, especially with reference to European waters. Can they do this, of course they can. An earlier commentary mentioned that a report on the CFP brought a vote which allows the EU rights over the sea bed. So the rights are there, prepared in advance.

There was also a report on, "adequate, safe and sustainable pensions". This is a re-run of an earlier attempt to hijack pensions which was all about transferability of pensions, helping people moving from one country to another. On that occasion I pointed out that no legislation was necessary because different pension companies would offer different policies with a view to creating a "niche" market. That's just like Insurance Companies offering policies for different customers who shop around for what suits them. Pensions are, I said, an insurance against reduced circumstances after retirement.

I do not know how much notice they took but this report disappeared, we now have it back in different form. That is how the EU works of course. Don't frighten the horses, put it back on the shelf, let people think its gone, then bring it out again with a few alterations as a new departure.

Wednesday Votes on the European banking authority and Credit Institutions will do us no good. Worse to come.

A report on Audiovisual media services was passed. This tells the news agencies how to presnt news, how and what to present and will control what the TV companies will be allowed to broadcast, ie calls for a broad interpretation of what constitutes items of "Major interest to society". EU Big Brother looms. Adopted by 593 - 69 votes.

Finally, "Mutual recognition of protection measures in civil matters", in effect this is about domestic violence. It sets up a European Protection Order enabling a judge in any part of the EU to grant a domestic violence injunction which will be enforceable without question in the UK and may lead to persons being arrested and imprisoned for alleged breaches by UK judges who will have lost jurisdiction over domestic violence matters.

This will make the European Arrest Warrant look tame. We voted against but it passed by 602 - 23 votes. I/ we have sent an explanation of vote describing our opposition and that UK law is perfectly capable of dealing with domestic violence matters. Note that the EU can override UK law in this matter. This will lead to the next step of overturning our laws in other respects.

For me it brings to mind my day in Rotherham helping with the by-election there. I did my bit at the table in the market place, joining several other UKIP members including a lady magistrate. Or, rather, a former magistrate. After many years experience she increasingly found that she was having to dispense justice EU- style, not according to UK law. So she quit and joined us.

I just hope that this is read by people who are not UKIP members, indeed, by those who support our EU membership. To those people I say, "Whose law do you want?" Or, to put it an other way, "do you now understand that we are losing control of our own country. That the EU continually ratchets up their regulations, starting with something apparently sensible, in order to exert control over increasingly wide fields of activity".

Britain started Parliamentary Democracy which has been copied around the world. Where it has been used you will find increasingly prosperous and peaceful countries. European countries have not followed our lead, they are now trying to catch up without looking at what we have to offer. The wretched ECHR was brought in after the last war to prevent the atrocities inflicted across Europe in the thirties and forties. Why do we need it, we didn't build gas chambers.

Derek Clark MEP Strasbourg May 22nd 2013  

Northampton Commentary Friday 26th April 2013 COUNTY COUNCIL ELECTIONS

Northampton Commentary Friday 26^th April 2013

COUNTY COUNCIL ELECTIONS

The Chronicle & Echo, the local Northampton paper, conducted an on-line survey over lunch-time today, asking people to vote for who they thought would win the County Council Elections a week hence.

Leaders of UKIP, Tory, Labour, Lib-Dem, Greens and “others” took part in an on-line Q & A.. With no leader as such we were asked to nominate a spokesperson and we put Margot Parker up for it. Views were expressed and points made over a two hour debate and people could vote on line. Voting continued into the late afternoon, and at 4.30 pm the figures were,-

Conservative 24% Labour 11% Lib-Dem 3%

Others 5% Green 16% UKIP 42%

WELL DONE MARGOT!!

The leaders of the other parties included Brendan Glynane (Lib-Dem) and Tony Clarke (Green), both well known in the town. Tony is an ex labour MP, holding the Northampton South Seat for two successive elections, 1997 & 2001. He fell out with the Labour party and held a Borough Council ward as Independent Labour over two elections, now a Green. A pity in many ways, I don’t like to see former students of mine being badly treated.

As for the Tory leader today you may recall my latest Strasbourg commentary in which I commented on the odd statements he made as Tory leader of the Northants CC when I met him at Geddington during Nigel’s whistle-stop tour. He claimed that the expensive Brussels office the CC were to establish would generate hundreds of thousands of pounds for businesses in the county, seconds after saying that local elections were not UKIP business since there was no connection between a County Council and the EU!

I said then that he was confused, but I had not realised how much. One would think that, as local Party and CC leader of some standing now, he should have been doing his stuff in the on-line debate, but was conspicuous by his absence. He had a dental appointment!! Now we all know how difficult making such appointments can be but there are times, are there not?

It’s all to play for next week, get those leaflets out, they’re no use next Friday.

Good luck to all of you

Derek Clark MEP Northampton 26^th April 2013

Brussels Commentary Employment Committee 22nd - 23rd April 2013

Brussels Commentary Employment Committee 22nd - 23rd April 2013

A great number of votes in one day, most concerning money. European Funds, budget priorities, Social housing, Aid to the deprived and so on.

Among these were the European Social Fund and the Globalisation Adjustment Fund. These had gone to a Trilogue because there was no agreement as to the amounts of money to be put aside from the budget. The Trilogue is the Commission, The Council and Parliament meeting to thrash it out. Parliament is always represented in such trilogues by members of the committee concerned, in this case Employment. Council is represented by some of the appropriate Ministers of member states.

There was no agreement in these trilogue discussions. That simply means that Parliament (ie MEPs) wanted to spend more, the Council (Elected MPs of Member States) wanted to spend less. The representative from employment committee told us that the division became discord as the Council wanted to operate the European Social Fund themselves. This was totally unacceptable to the Parliament reps who promptly walked out. Back to square one.

It means of course that member states are, at last, beginning to watch the pennies more closely and are trying to hang on to taxpayers cash more than they used to. Well, its a step in the right direction. Cameron need not claim a victory yet, the issue is still up in the air.

All of this, austerity and cut backs, spells unemployment. Figures given today show 27 million out of work in the EU, of which youth unemployment is 5.7 million. Hence the other half of the debates this week, furthering youth employment. Many fine words, but that's all it is, no actual plans but with "Erasmus" freely quoted. I am sure you know what that is. No?, its the EU program to enable to students to travel abroad for University Education. But that costs money because the EU is to help with the extra costs involved by each student! Where that will come from is another matter,- 8 member states have cut education budgets by 8% this year.

Meanwhile another spending plan, the European Fund for Aid to the Most deprived is to get 3.5 billion Euros this year. Will that include our money when we already have food banks for the needy? That itself is a matter of shame for us in the 21st century.

Away from money a green MEP is promoting, "Gender balance among non-executive directors of companies listed on the stock exchange." That mean more women on the boards but no quota. She proposes sanctions on Companies who do not make the effort, or do not explain why there is still an imbalance, but there is to be no compulsion! And the sanctions are not specified.

Derek Clark MEP Brussels 23rd April 2013