Poland - Is the EU starting to crumble

[longwood50]

10 hours ago, JohninDubin said:

I seriously doubt that they are looking after their own people's interests. Populists generally have a poor record of working for the good of their own people because their number one project becomes holding on to the reins of power once they have hold of them

And just tell me which country has those "angels" that only look forward to their own people's interest, have a great record of working for the good of their own people and don't have as their number one project holding on the reins of power. 

[Fester]

33 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

You are either lying, or you don't know what you are talking about.

Here is the original post from Palooka #78579

I thought that the EU would fall apart when they had the liquidity problem of the P.I.G.S., Portugal, Italy Greece and Spain some years ago.  It was suggested to me, by a corporate banker that I knew, that many of these countries cheated their way into the EU membership. Supposedly for membership you had to show so many billions of dollars or equivalent.  Apparently they all borrowed the money, showed it for membership and then repaid it, after qualifying, with huge interest.That banker retired on the commissions he made from this.

Glad the UK got out, may have short term pain but will come back stronger.

I'm not lying. I didn't know that you were talking about this post. There was another sub-thread about how Greece managed to qualify for entry into the EEC and the cookbook subject came up.

Palloka's post was about the PIGS economies faltering post 2008 GFC. A different thing but with Greece's original problem further exposed.

I agree that Italy was not involved, they got in early .... before books needed to be cooked!

That is all.

 

Edited October 11, 2021 by Fester
added 2nd para

[Fester]

10 minutes ago, gummy said:

Don't forget that although the UK has officially left the UK there is still a few billions that the UK are required to contribute to the EU under the terms of the leaving agreement. Much of that is for joint ventures already under way.

However one old wag suspected that the bulk of it will go to Macron so as the French minor road network can be greatly improved in order to facilitate the faster movement of illegal immigrants through France and onto the coast ready for embarkation across the channel.

Don't worry Gummy, not forgotten. We should have had a clean break.

[gummy]

7 minutes ago, Fester said:

I'm not lying. I didn't know that you were talking about this post. There was another sub-thread about how Greece managed to qualify for entry into the EEC and the cookbook subject came up.

I agree that Italy was not involved, they got in early .... before books needed to be cooked!

That is all.

Gentlemen, never mind about how countries qualified , can you remember the scam where under the common agricultural policy the Italians , Spanish and Greeks, in order to get subsides claimed that they were growing so many olive trees, the size of Europe was physically not big enough if it were true.

[Fluke]

1 hour ago, Benroon said:

What the ......you're making things up.

He has petitioned the UK government for a “reasonably liberal immigration system”' - what this translates as is I can't look a complete moron by now saying brexit was a disaster so I'll water it down and ask for  a “reasonably liberal immigration system”. 

He thought he would get rich on tattoed, overweight alcoholics coming to his soulless bars draped in Union Jacks celebrating the despatch of Johnny Foreigner and it's going wrong - as people of a higher intellect were trying to tell him.

Here's one link, of many, of him squirming

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/tim-martin-calls-for-more-eu-migration-as-wetherspoons-is-hit-by-bar-staff-shortage-272908/

Gotta laugh really, you stated that Tim Witherspoon is begging the Government to allow Europeans in to work to save his empire , I disagreed with that and you called me a liar and to prove that I was lying and that you were telling the truth and that Tim Witherspoon did require European workers to work for him, you posted a link which was updated and said 

 

"Correction: This article is based on UK Daily Telegraph reporting that has since been found to be misleading. The article may have given the impression that Wetherspoons in common with other companies in the hospitality sector was struggling to recruit staff. In fact, Wetherspoons is not facing staff shortages or recruitment issues. We apologise for any confusion and are happy to correct the record."

 

   Which shows that I was correct and that you were mistaken..................thanks for the link

[Fester]

40 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

"that is the truth as I see it"

I think that's code for "how do explain my disingenuous comment  when he keeps hitting me with evidence"? I know. I'll tell him it's what I believe, and then it can't be a lie.

We may well not believe the same things, but at least I can back most my beliefs with facts. 

I had intended to block you yesterday, not because I disagree with you, but because most of your posts are trolling. And I am not the only person on here who has said that to you. But on the basis of one sensible post you made, I gave you the benefit the doubt. It's not that I agreed with what you had to say in that post, but because it contributed something to the debate. Since then, you have gone back into persistent troll mode, especially with your deliberately ambiguous comments. Now I accept that my willingness to engage with you was a mistake, and it violated one of the primary rules of the Internet: Don't feed the troll,

Accordingly, you are now blocked.

I can only remember you calling me a troll (several times now). It is not apprecited but I will continue to challenge any posts which I think deserve one, even though you seem to view that as trolling.

 

 

Edited October 11, 2021 by Fester

[Fester]

19 minutes ago, gummy said:

Gentlemen, never mind about how countries qualified , can you remember the scam where under the common agricultural policy the Italians , Spanish and Greeks, in order to get subsides claimed that they were growing so many olive trees, the size of Europe was physically not big enough if it were true.

And don't forget the claims for the failed spaghetti crops!

 

[gummy]

Just now, Fester said:

And don't forget the claims for the failed spaghetti crops!

That was just on one day 1st April, the olive growing scam was years

[JohninDublin]

16 minutes ago, 23RD said:

Many thanks for your post John is you life story as long?.

Back onto topic Hungary and Poland might not be perfect in the eyes off many LIBERALS but to there People they have huge support strong Countries require strong leaders.

Have you noticed the Countries that don't want socialism are the one's that have lived under Communism.

Your sarcasm is noted. I don't suppose it occurs to you that I need to make a special effort in posting to you because you clearly seem to think that whataboutery, which is essentially trying to make two wrongs equal a right, seems to be your weapon of choice? I had to explain that twice. That's why I needed to make more detailed replies. Of course, I could just say you are wrong and leave it at that as some do on here, but how does that add to the debate? Do you think that if you make a mistake, I should just ignore it?

I note on your emphasis on "liberal". Conversely, I see many "Conservatives" as having only one tool in their foolbox (not a typo), a hammer. The problem with that, is if this is the only tool they have, then pretty soon, every problem they encounter begins to look like a nail. 

I am not sure what Liberalism, Socialism or Communism has to do with your post. I think the make-up of the Commission can best be described as centrist, with most if not all the appointees put in place by centre-left and centre-right. The exceptions being Poland and Hungary. 

Isn't funny that some of those who used to live under communism, and you claim don't want socialism, are voting for party's that will indulge in press censorship, purging of intellectuals and sacking of independent judges would. That's what the Communists did, as did the Fascists. Maybe the Commies were right after all? As for strong leaders, they seem to like modelling themselves on the likes of Mussolini and Stalin.

Just one final point. How can the people know whether they want socialism or not when they are only allowed to read about it in a negative light?  And by "Socialism", I don't mean the failed communist system, but the gentler form which is based on the concept of "To each according to their needs, from each according to their abilities". These include such dangerous ideas, as Public Sanitation, Education, Social Security, Pensions, Public Libraries, Healthcare etc. You might do well study Scandinavian Politics, where the govs are nearly always centre left, or centre right. When the left lose office, the right rarely unpicks the advances made by their predecessors. 

[mickkotlarski]

2 hours ago, JohninDubin said:

Your posts are still missing the point. Whether Varadkar has done anything wrong and the level of his venality has yet to be determined AFAIK. But even if this turns out to be true, your post is pure whataboutery, and unless two wrongs make a right, that does not excuse the corruption in Hungary and Poland.

But as you seem to want to keep attacking Ireland, consider this: Relying on the Corruption Perception Index, Ireland is ranked the 20th least corrupt country on the planet. Poland is 56th. Hungary is 69th. Hmmm? 

As for your comment "That brings us back to topic the EU is a failed corrupt experiment by unelected bureaucrats.", that really displays gross ignorance on your part. How do you think these people get their jobs? They are appointed, one each country, by the gov of the day at the time that the Commission is formed. They are like all bureaucrats, such as (UK) Chief Medical Officer of Health, Chief of the Defence Staff, Head of the Civil Service and Ambassadors, just to name a few, appointed by democratically elected govs. Remind me please; when was the last time you were asked to vote for an Ambassador? 

I cannot believe how many people bought into the false premise that these people have no democratic mandate, something that was started by Thatcher. Did she ever give anyone the right to elect the Commissioners and Members of the Councils of Ministers that the UK sent to Europe?  

Turning specifically to the word "corrupt", this might give you a real picture of the state of affairs. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36276175 It turns out that most of the "corruption", a word that I use in this case to cover errors as well as downright criminality, was nothing to do with EU itself, but was the fault of the member states distribution of the money.

Here is an extract specific to the UK: "

On 28 April 2016, the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee called on the UK government to improve how it spends EU funds.

The committee found that UK departments contribute "additional complexity" to the implementation of EU programmes, especially agricultural and rural development ones, which also drives up errors. The errors have cost the UK government "at least £650m" in penalties, to the European Commission, over the past decade.

 

From that, you might be able to glean that corruption and mismanagement is punished by the EU in that they have the powers, and use them to recover this money.

 

The report also concludes that fraud accounts for 0.2% of the EU budget. The UK National Audit Office says that fraud and error accounts for 1.9% of the entire Dept of Work and Pensions budget, and for HMRC, it was 4.4%

 

My posts might begin to give people some idea of how Brexit occurred. Thatcher says these people are unelected, but does nothing to allow the people to have a democratic vote on the issue. Someone else says the EU is a hotbed of corruption and add the lie they haven't had their accounts signed off for 20 years, when it is their own country responsible for most of the fraud and "mis-spending". Then others imply evil laws are emanating from Brussels, but they never actually describe what these laws are, and those who believe this, cannot name any of these laws let alone how they were impacted by these. Yet another will tell you the EU are heading into a super-state and "I don't want that". but as anyone who has read my posts on this thread will see, nobody ever explains what is wrong with that concept.

 

Too many believe the lies and don't do their own due diligence. But the real irony is that all these lies and half-truths emanate from politicians. If you ask most people how much they trust politicians, they will tell you they rank slightly above nonces and at about the same level as used car salesmen and tabloid journalists.

 

Please do me a favour before you post more whataboutery. Can you preface your comments by telling me whether you think two wrongs make a right, and then I can just ignore your comment.

Hi JohninDubin

Corruption actually is a problem in Europe. As you pointed out the lions share is coming from members states rather than the oligarchs themselves and although Ireland, Hungary and Poland have been targeted in this thread it is nations like Malta, Romania and Bulgaria that fight it out for the wooden spoon. Malta is so bad that anticorruption journalists have been threatened and one murdered.

One thing in the EU’s favour is that unlike many left winged institutions it hasn’t attacked whistle blowers and has made an effort to protect them. But the European Council States group against corruption has openly admitted that it will 2 years before any effective directive can be established.   

Sure the public sector corruption is relatively low but my concern is in the private sector and what NGO’s have cooking. There is no Single European Public Prosecutor with full Authority and this is itself is concerning.

Some of the biggest scandals such as the Danske and Nordea banks (Denmark) which has hit private shareholders very hard, Operation Marques (Portugal) and its money laundering activities through private/public via an EU backed government construction companies and telecommunication companies. Resulting in the collapse of Banco Espirito Santo and leaving millions of their clients penniless. And then there’s Dieselgate (Germany + Others) in which the EUs fragmented regulations still have not bought the emissions hoax to order. Denmark, Germany and Portugal have very low levels of corruption. Yet some high order scams have occurred.  

My biggest complaint though is deregulation. Sure a great thing for businesses but it has also opened the door to fraudsters. Some who are anti globalization have rightfully raised this concern.    

As to how truly clean or corrupt the hierarchy in the EU is cannot be decisively confirmed.

But some of the very sluggish and gentle attempts to fight it have left people wondering.  After all those in power are still unelected officials. Be it that they are not Ambassadors or Defense staff chiefs.

[Fluke]

1 hour ago, Benroon said:

What the ......you're making things up.

He has petitioned the UK government for a “reasonably liberal immigration system”' - what this translates as is I can't look a complete moron by now saying brexit was a disaster so I'll water it down and ask for  a “reasonably liberal immigration system”. 

He thought he would get rich on tattoed, overweight alcoholics coming to his soulless bars draped in Union Jacks celebrating the despatch of Johnny Foreigner and it's going wrong - as people of a higher intellect were trying to tell him.

Here's one link, of many, of him squirming

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/tim-martin-calls-for-more-eu-migration-as-wetherspoons-is-hit-by-bar-staff-shortage-272908/

Rather telling that you altered the full quote to make it appear that Tim opposed Brexit .

The full quote was

 “The UK has a low birth rate. A reasonably liberal immigration system controlled by those we have elected, as distinct from the EU system,"

   Which is actually in support of Brexit , he was also speaking to a reporter and he wasnt petitioning the Government  , just giving his opinion , Brexit was always about the U.K Government regulating foreign workers , it wasnt about closing the door . 

   This time the report you linked was stated to be misleading , but reporters often do that , change peoples words around to suit their own agenda and then publish misleading reports  

[23RD]

10 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

make two wrongs equal a right, seems to be your weapon of choice

Not really but to you LIBERALS  doing wrong seems to be excusable as long as its in a Liberal cause.

 

13 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

Isn't funny that some of those who used to live under communism, and you claim don't want socialism, are voting for party's that will indulge in press censorship, purging of intellectuals and sacking of independent judges would.

I'm sure most People in the former Soviet block Countries have parents and grandparents to tell them about the evils of Communism and Totalitarian State (like the EU aspires to become).

[JohninDublin]

1 hour ago, Fluke said:

The E.U immigrants in the U.K were allowed to stay and work in the U.K. post Brexit .

There are now more job opportunities in Eastern Europe and they now longer want to go abroad to work 

Yes they were allowed to stay, but needed to register first. Those who didn't who we now desperately need, require work permits. BTW, have you seen what a WP costs? https://www.gov.uk/skilled-worker-visa/how-much-it-costs. Typically, it costs in the region of £2500 for three years, payable in advance, and in most cases, unless your employer is prepared to take care of your initial costs you also have to show minimum savings of £1270 to tide you over your first month. So you need the best part of £4k to get a WP. No point in mentioning Tax and NI after that I think. And the worst of it is, you are tied to one employer. If he's a tyrant, unfairly sacks you, or needs to make you redundant, that money is non-refundable and then you need to rely on the vagaries of UK bureaucracy as to whether you may be allowed to transfer to another employer.

I've seen plenty of people complaining about the problems of getting into Phuket, and how they think it's too risky to come out on the wrong side of that deal and waste their money. If I had to decide as to which was the greater risk, I think there is far less risk gambling on Phuket. More to the point, If I could accumulate £4k in savings as a Pole, why would I need to come to the UK in any case.

If you think Brexit has nothing to do with this and it's all the fault of Covid, then ponder this. There is a NHS website specifically for the recruitment of Healthcare professionals from the EU. Following the referendum, traffic on the website fell 94% and has never recovered. That was five years ago. Now let's see you blame that one on Covid? 

[mickkotlarski]

12 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

Your sarcasm is noted. I don't suppose it occurs to you that I need to make a special effort in posting to you because you clearly seem to think that whataboutery, which is essentially trying to make two wrongs equal a right, seems to be your weapon of choice? I had to explain that twice. That's why I needed to make more detailed replies. Of course, I could just say you are wrong and leave it at that as some do on here, but how does that add to the debate? Do you think that if you make a mistake, I should just ignore it?

I note on your emphasis on "liberal". Conversely, I see many "Conservatives" as having only one tool in their foolbox (not a typo), a hammer. The problem with that, is if this is the only tool they have, then pretty soon, every problem they encounter begins to look like a nail. 

I am not sure what Liberalism, Socialism or Communism has to do with your post. I think the make-up of the Commission can best be described as centrist, with most if not all the appointees put in place by centre-left and centre-right. The exceptions being Poland and Hungary. 

Isn't funny that some of those who used to live under communism, and you claim don't want socialism, are voting for party's that will indulge in press censorship, purging of intellectuals and sacking of independent judges would. That's what the Communists did, as did the Fascists. Maybe the Commies were right after all? As for strong leaders, they seem to like modelling themselves on the likes of Mussolini and Stalin.

Just one final point. How can the people know whether they want socialism or not when they are only allowed to read about it in a negative light?  And by "Socialism", I don't mean the failed communist system, but the gentler form which is based on the concept of "To each according to their needs, from each according to their abilities". These include such dangerous ideas, as Public Sanitation, Education, Social Security, Pensions, Public Libraries, Healthcare etc. You might do well study Scandinavian Politics, where the govs are nearly always centre left, or centre right. When the left lose office, the right rarely unpicks the advances made by their predecessors. 

John

23rd actually does have a good point that is truly relevant. Nations are affected by their own history. Poland and Hungary saw Ottoman, Hapsburg, Nazi German and recently Soviet occupation and felt the brunt from foreign intervention.

With regard to the EU involvement they are again being dictated to even though they have had benefits from this. Although you may not see Victor Orban or Andy Duda as the model ideal of a nations leader but comparing them to Mussolini and Stalin is a tab over the top. 

 Afterall is it not platforms that are very left wing oriented such as facebook etc that are clamping down on free speech by labeling it as hate speech purely because it's not the desired narrative. Even if irrefutable evidence is provided. News outlets are also terrible propaganda outlets and CNN, BBC etc are very biased. When it comes to censorship we in the West are not innocent.

[mickkotlarski]

58 minutes ago, 23RD said:

Not really but to you LIBERALS  doing wrong seems to be excusable as long as its in a Liberal cause.

I'm sure most People in the former Soviet block Countries have parents and grandparents to tell them about the evils of Communism and Totalitarian State (like the EU aspires to become).

Absolutely. One of mates is a very friendly Russian that told me some horrid tales of what his folks experienced. In 1989 when Gorby finally put an end to this regime the skies in most major Russian cities turned orange from the Communist ID cards set on fire in garbage bins and the garbos were worked senseless for days. If the former Eastern bloc wants to give the hammer and sickle the finger...be my guest.

Again 23rd has a good point and Liberalism has in itself become totalitarian. (Just this morning) Who would believe that Lufthansa and British Airways are ordering the pilots to say people rather than address them as Ladies and Gentlemen. 

Even in this thread some genuine attacks have been made on Euro skeptics some of it a tab harsh. Although in closing JohninDubin made some good points. Socialism and Communism are two different ideologies. 

I guess this thread besides giving the Thaiger moderators a few headaches has also allowed some good points from both perspectives. At 10 pages it makes Game of Thrones look like a mini series.

 

[Fester]

Winter is Coming .... will it make the Euro Crumble?

[mickkotlarski]

23 minutes ago, Fester said:

Winter is Coming .... will it make the Euro Crumble?

Maybe yes. Maybe no. But some clean and open referendums will help.

[JohninDublin]

34 minutes ago, mickkotlarski said:

Hi JohninDubin

Corruption actually is a problem in Europe. As you pointed out the lions share is coming from members states rather than the oligarchs themselves and although Ireland, Hungary and Poland have been targeted in this thread it is nations like Malta, Romania and Bulgaria that fight it out for the wooden spoon. Malta is so bad that anticorruption journalists have been threatened and one murdered.

One thing in the EU’s favour is that unlike many left winged institutions it hasn’t attacked whistle blowers and has made an effort to protect them. But the European Council States group against corruption has openly admitted that it will 2 years before any effective directive can be established.   

Sure the public sector corruption is relatively low but my concern is in the private sector and what NGO’s have cooking. There is no Single European Public Prosecutor with full Authority and this is itself is concerning.

Some of the biggest scandals such as the Danske and Nordea banks (Denmark) which has hit private shareholders very hard, Operation Marques (Portugal) and its money laundering activities through private/public via an EU backed government construction companies and telecommunication companies. Resulting in the collapse of Banco Espirito Santo and leaving millions of their clients penniless. And then there’s Dieselgate (Germany + Others) in which the EUs fragmented regulations still have not bought the emissions hoax to order. Denmark, Germany and Portugal have very low levels of corruption. Yet some high order scams have occurred.  

My biggest complaint though is deregulation. Sure a great thing for businesses but it has also opened the door to fraudsters. Some who are anti globalization have rightfully raised this concern.    

As to how truly clean or corrupt the hierarchy in the EU is cannot be decisively confirmed.

But some of the very sluggish and gentle attempts to fight it have left people wondering.  After all those in power are still unelected officials. Be it that they are not Ambassadors or Defense staff chiefs.

Thanks for a very thoughtful post. Just to clarify something, the allegations against Varadkar are that he breached both the Official Secrets Act 1963 and Criminal Justice (Corrupt Practices) 2018. This surrounds him divulging the full contents of a draft agreement on GP reform to the head of a Doctors Union. Much of it's contents had already been widely leaked to the press prior to this. He admits that this did happen. Regarding the OSA, he states: “The ambit of that Act is limited to persons holding a “public office”... the definition of “public office” expressly excludes members of either House of the Oireachtas." (Oireachtas is Irish Parliament).

Regarding CJ 2018, there is no allegations that he made any personal financial gain from this. Both matters are under Police investigation. I am not a fan of any of the 3 main parties in Ireland, and my assessment of the story is that it is the usual shenanigans that we see in Irish Politics, of attempted manufacture of scandals. Error of judgement definitely, but I'd be very surprised if there is a prosecution. Full story:  https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/varadkar-rejects-allegations-he-acted-unlawfully-in-sharing-draft-gp-contract-1.4396697

I am well aware that corruption is worse in other countries, particularly Malta. One really apt to this thread is John Dalli (aka Johnny Cash), He was so corrupt, the Maltese gov decided to nominate him as Commissioner to the EU in order to get rid of the prob. He was given the Health Portfolio and part of his brief was to draw up anti-smoking legislation. He used this as an opportunity to extort Tobacco companies. He wasn't cheap either. He demanded €800 mill. Big Tobacco mounted a sting operation and got him on tape, and the Commission suggested to Malta that he "needed" to be recalled.

But at the risk of sounding like a broken record, pointing out there are worse villains is whataboutery. This in turn tends to legitimise the lesser offender. It's like saying that the Yorkshire Ripper wasn't as bad as Shipman. That may be true, but would you want to give YR a lesser sentence than he got?

Regarding your comments on EU's slow responses to this, that is one of the fair criticisms of the EU. The process is started with a proposal by one of the (unelected) Council of Ministers. If agreed to, the legislation must then be formulated by a Commission dept, and then scrutinised by all the other depts to make sure none of the legislation contravenes current EU rules, laws, directives and case law handed down by the ECJ. It is then passed back to the PM's etc for voting on, and if passes, is then sent to the Parliament for approval. One of the problems with that system, is if a typical member state gov lasts on average 4 years, then there are new members of the CoM about every 3.5 months. A new member joins and they are opposed to what their predecessor agreed to, and this adds to the delay. The same possibility occurs if there is a new PM.

As far as the possibility of the Commission being corrupt goes. It's 22 years since there has been any such scandals. I think Johnny Cash shows what happens nowadays.

Regarding Dieselgate, the issue was not that the EU did nothing. It was that EU actually did act, and someone decided to cheat. To hold the EU responsible is like holding a gov responsible because someone murdered someone in contravention of an anti-Murder law.

As to your comment about the unelected, there are very good reasons for this. But rather tan going through those, think about it like this. The Commissioners do not represent their countries, but a portfolio, and in effect that makes them neutral. But if it's matter of an elected official, he has to hold regular meetings with his entire constituency as well as give up the neutrality the job requires.

[JohninDublin]

2 hours ago, 23RD said:

Not really but to you LIBERALS  doing wrong seems to be excusable as long as its in a Liberal cause.

I'm sure most People in the former Soviet block Countries have parents and grandparents to tell them about the evils of Communism and Totalitarian State (like the EU aspires to become).

"Not really"? And yet in both your prior posts, whataboutery was used. And where in my post have I engaged in double standards? BTW, you really want to be careful about capitalising "Liberal". The way you do. It has all the hallmarks of a term in this particular case, and it's the second time you've done it. 

As for your comment about grand-parents, I am sure you are right. But I am also aware that there are grandparents who fondly remember these as "the good old days" when they look at what has happened since the Russian Empire has collapsed. I'd tend to go with the first group in my views on that.

Finally, you really do yourself no favours with your description of EU future aspirations. I am sure you are aware of the saying that a stopped clock is right twice a day. Let's look at how far the EU has gone down that road to date? The USSR lasted just under 75 years. In that time they invaded multiple countries, murdered 15 million of their own people brutally repressed popular uprisings in Czechoslovakia and Hungary and obliterated all free media. To their credit, they didn't ban elections People were allowed to vote, but there was only ever one name on each ballot paper. If you voted, they gave you a cup of tea and a biscuit (Tony Hancock's Blood Donor would have said "I'll have some of that"). If you didn't vote you went on the list as a potential dissident. Next year, the EU will celebrate it's seventieth birthday. Fair enough, the USSR was around for 5 years longer, but I would say that the EU has a lot of catching up to within the next 5 years. What do you think.

Of course one of the hallmarks of draconian regimes are very harsh sentences for even trivial offences. Can you tell me, what is the maximum sentence that the EU gives out for anyone that breaches EU law? 

[Benroon]

4 hours ago, Fester said:

That whole publiction looks to be squirmworthy.

Why ?

Usual quip - no reposte - it's what's called trolling ! 

[mickkotlarski]

13 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

Thanks for a very thoughtful post. Just to clarify something, the allegations against Varadkar are that he breached both the Official Secrets Act 1963 and Criminal Justice (Corrupt Practices) 2018. This surrounds him divulging the full contents of a draft agreement on GP reform to the head of a Doctors Union. Much of it's contents had already been widely leaked to the press prior to this. He admits that this did happen. Regarding the OSA, he states: “The ambit of that Act is limited to persons holding a “public office”... the definition of “public office” expressly excludes members of either House of the Oireachtas." (Oireachtas is Irish Parliament).

Regarding CJ 2018, there is no allegations that he made any personal financial gain from this. Both matters are under Police investigation. I am not a fan of any of the 3 main parties in Ireland, and my assessment of the story is that it is the usual shenanigans that we see in Irish Politics, of attempted manufacture of scandals. Error of judgement definitely, but I'd be very surprised if there is a prosecution. Full story:  https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/varadkar-rejects-allegations-he-acted-unlawfully-in-sharing-draft-gp-contract-1.4396697

I am well aware that corruption is worse in other countries, particularly Malta. One really apt to this thread is John Dalli (aka Johnny Cash), He was so corrupt, the Maltese gov decided to nominate him as Commissioner to the EU in order to get rid of the prob. He was given the Health Portfolio and part of his brief was to draw up anti-smoking legislation. He used this as an opportunity to extort Tobacco companies. He wasn't cheap either. He demanded €800 mill. Big Tobacco mounted a sting operation and got him on tape, and the Commission suggested to Malta that he "needed" to be recalled.

But at the risk of sounding like a broken record, pointing out there are worse villains is whataboutery. This in turn tends to legitimise the lesser offender. It's like saying that the Yorkshire Ripper wasn't as bad as Shipman. That may be true, but would you want to give YR a lesser sentence than he got?

Regarding your comments on EU's slow responses to this, that is one of the fair criticisms of the EU. The process is started with a proposal by one of the (unelected) Council of Ministers. If agreed to, the legislation must then be formulated by a Commission dept, and then scrutinised by all the other depts to make sure none of the legislation contravenes current EU rules, laws, directives and case law handed down by the ECJ. It is then passed back to the PM's etc for voting on, and if passes, is then sent to the Parliament for approval. One of the problems with that system, is if a typical member state gov lasts on average 4 years, then there are new members of the CoM about every 3.5 months. A new member joins and they are opposed to what their predecessor agreed to, and this adds to the delay. The same possibility occurs if there is a new PM.

As far as the possibility of the Commission being corrupt goes. It's 22 years since there has been any such scandals. I think Johnny Cash shows what happens nowadays.

Regarding Dieselgate, the issue was not that the EU did nothing. It was that EU actually did act, and someone decided to cheat. To hold the EU responsible is like holding a gov responsible because someone murdered someone in contravention of an anti-Murder law.

As to your comment about the unelected, there are very good reasons for this. But rather tan going through those, think about it like this. The Commissioners do not represent their countries, but a portfolio, and in effect that makes them neutral. But if it's matter of an elected official, he has to hold regular meetings with his entire constituency as well as give up the neutrality the job requires.

Cheers John

As you have gathered I'm skeptical of the EU and I don't like some of the directions it has taken.

Still though I think that calling the Euro hierarchy corrupt is senseless. If the powers at be are truly corrupt they did a good job at hiding it. If they are innocent then whats the point accusing them when it is not relevant.  Both are possible but non confirm able.

But I do address a lack of decisiveness in regulating corruption. Even though they themselves may not have acted dishonestly or performed any shifty deals the process of law enforcement is  too sluggish and if they can appoint a Public Prosecutor many of the scams both ongoing and revealed can be hammered.

All sorts of penalties are delivered to members that "don't conform" but  so little is done to bring criminals to justice. If the EU is to survive then this is an issue that needs immediate action, not meetings and fancy drinks served while EU hierarchy clap over punishing states they don't agree with.

You may also have gathered I'm not a fan of communism but if there is a +ve to be had then its a quick speedy justice. This would be perfect as EU justice is not Kangaroo court. But by the time any sound legislation is given the rats gnaw away happily. Although relating to the US and not relevant to this discussion the open book approach to Covid treatment has seen the new drug Molnupiravir being sold at US$720 when the production cost of these 10 tablets is a very affordable US$17. The EU has similar de regulatory issues that I also voice concern over.

Some of the surveys taken of EU citizens with regard to corruption is scary. The Transparency Organization asked 44.000 people in Europe and a third believe that corruption is alive and kicking. Many more believe its not getting better. As mentioned Malta and Romania are terrible.

The EU may have actually done some good in curbing some of their corruption in these countries but they still remain the rascals in the family.

My concerns are legitimate. Should Serbia, Albania and Bosnia be included into the EU?

Though some may shout YES or NO without any real thought but I can see some heartaches following. Croatia (although nice place) hasn't exactly been a corruption free model. Yet the EU goes on its recruitment quest looking for new members. Is it to unite Europe or is it to gather safety in numbers and pass rules that may not suit all members. Or could it be that both apply simultaneously?

Fortunately as mentioned in a previous thread to PBS. Leaving the EU is not a macabre death.

There is a nation right in the middle of the continent. It is called Switzerland. It does not interfere in the politics of other countries yet has good diplomatic relations. Its citizens have the right to bear fire arms yet there is no hint of high school massacres. It has a universal health care system regardless of the citizens status in society. It  allows immigration yet denied citizenship to a Muslim that refused to shake the hands of the issuing officer because of her sex. It allows her folk to smoke pot in public without fear of incarceration but has a very low prison population while still keeping crime levels in check. It has a stable currency and good standard of life.

Should nations decide to leave the EU then what better role model. The EU offered entry but the Swiss refused it. Nations can govern themselves and still keep good relations with the EU.

Anyway old boy. Thanks for the comments. In the end time will tell and the debates will continue .

 

 

 

 

 

[Benroon]

4 hours ago, Fluke said:

Gotta laugh really, you stated that Tim Witherspoon is begging the Government to allow Europeans in to work to save his empire , I disagreed with that and you called me a liar and to prove that I was lying and that you were telling the truth and that Tim Witherspoon did require European workers to work for him, you posted a link which was updated and said 

"Correction: This article is based on UK Daily Telegraph reporting that has since been found to be misleading. The article may have given the impression that Wetherspoons in common with other companies in the hospitality sector was struggling to recruit staff. In fact, Wetherspoons is not facing staff shortages or recruitment issues. We apologise for any confusion and are happy to correct the record."

   Which shows that I was correct and that you were mistaken..................thanks for the link

Good grief - you would be an awful detective! He has appeared on TV numerous times pleading exactly as I stated - he was also on BBC's Question Time stating exactly that - in your forlorn haste to be right you've overlooked quite a lot of detail - so google this :- 

'tim wetherspoons looking for migrants' - then come back and tell us what google page you were on before you run out of links (many containing numerous interviews with the man himself) 

In order to help you further, as a member of the FTSE 250, TW has a duty of care not to spook the markets by telling it how it is, especially any negativity, but the cats out the bag. So a few seconds on google and a very limited knowledge of the markets would have helped you understand.

[JohninDublin]

2 hours ago, mickkotlarski said:

John

23rd actually does have a good point that is truly relevant. Nations are affected by their own history. Poland and Hungary saw Ottoman, Hapsburg, Nazi German and recently Soviet occupation and felt the brunt from foreign intervention.

With regard to the EU involvement they are again being dictated to even though they have had benefits from this. Although you may not see Victor Orban or Andy Duda as the model ideal of a nations leader but comparing them to Mussolini and Stalin is a tab over the top. 

 Afterall is it not platforms that are very left wing oriented such as facebook etc that are clamping down on free speech by labeling it as hate speech purely because it's not the desired narrative. Even if irrefutable evidence is provided. News outlets are also terrible propaganda outlets and CNN, BBC etc are very biased. When it comes to censorship we in the West are not innocent.

They are being dictated to because they became members of a club where the agreed to abide by the rules and obtained benefits from membership, and then reneged on their obligation to abide by the rules. I don't know about you, but if I were a member of that same club, I would be protesting loudly that this was happening. Regarding my reference to Stalin etc, I was comparing the tactics not the personalities. But it's early days yet.

Regarding censorship you are well off point. When CNN, Facebook etc indulge in censorship, that is solely at the discretion of the owners of that media. How does that even compare with govs that tell you what you can or can't report and will close you down if you don't comply. With regard to FB in particular. I don't see any "liberal" credentials for Zuckerberg. He as always struck me as being the sort of person who didn't care how he got his money, as long as he got it and feign deniability over his methods.

As for the BBC, that really is a crock. For the past 30 years, I've been listening to people tell me that the BBC are biased because "They hate women". Many men say the opposite. They are "pro-gay". Many gays say the opposite. Right wing. Many of those on the left say the opposite. Pro-Union. Many trade unionists say the opposite. Elitists. Many of the elite say the opposite. Name any two opposing groups and both will claim that the BBC is opposed to them.

What conclusions can I draw from this? How about the BBC is not biased. They just happen to hate everybody equally.

[23RD]

26 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

BTW, you really want to be careful about capitalising "Liberal"

I'm straight to the point I call a spade a spade.

 

27 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

The USSR lasted just under 75 years. In that time they invaded multiple countries, murdered 15 million of their own people brutally repressed popular uprisings in Czechoslovakia and Hungary and obliterated all free media.

I was a 17 year old Soldier in West Berlin when the wall came down Communism should have been consigned to history at that time however its still alive and well in the halls of the EU Headquarters in Brussels. Now the EU might not have murdered 15 million People like the Soviet Regime but it has been responsible for 1000's of deaths by its policies like the Schengen freedom off movement which has allowed the free movement of drugs, terrorist. human trafficking and un-vetted migrants throughout its member states.

 

45 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

Of course one of the hallmarks of draconian regimes are very harsh sentences for even trivial offences. Can you tell me, what is the maximum sentence that the EU gives out for anyone that breaches EU law?

Ah and lets talk about the ECHR shall we the same court that refuses to deport criminals like murderers rapist drug dealers muggers child abusers all because the the ECHR believes their entitled to a right of family life under article 8 if the above mentioned scumbags own a cat a tortoise or an underage bride.

The EU are unelected bureaucrats that make draconian laws and regulations destroy the fabric of their member states and the worse thing about it is they never asked the People if they wanted it.

I don't often give the UK credit but when the most important decision since the end of WW2 came BREXIT we pulled it out of the bag.  

[Benroon]

45 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

As for the BBC, that really is a crock. For the past 30 years, I've been listening to people tell me that the BBC are biased because "They hate women". Many men say the opposite. They are "pro-gay". Many gays say the opposite. Right wing. Many of those on the left say the opposite. Pro-Union. Many trade unionists say the opposite. Elitists. Many of the elite say the opposite. Name any two opposing groups and both will claim that the BBC is opposed to them.

What conclusions can I draw from this? How about the BBC is not biased. They just happen to hate everybody equally.

You too !! I've always been bemused by this - I don't particularly have time for the BBC with their absurd license fee and the fleets of limos I used to see outside their offices waiting to take staff home from my office, but they are often called rabidly leftist and I don't pick that up at all.

Perhaps your final sentence nails it and puts 30 odd years of bemusement to bed !