GL-W's WEBlog

The views, reprints & thoughts of Greg Lance-Watkins

Archive for February, 2014

>Guest Post Mary-Ellen Synon – On THE EU Fraud

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 20/02/2014

>Guest Post Mary-Ellen Synon – On THE EU Fraud

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

.

 Thursday 20 February 2014

Guest post from Mary-Ellen Synon

000a european_commission.jpg
“Eurosceptic” Tory backbenchers are yet again demonstrating that they have little idea of how the EU operates, writes Mary Ellen Synon in this guest post. According to today’s Daily Mail, Tory MPs think they can get the Prime Minister to send a “tough negotiator” to be Britain’s next European Commissioner. 
Thus are these “Eurosceptics” demanding that Cameron send someone to Brussels who will “fight Britain’s corner”. They want Environment Secretary Owen Paterson, former Defence Secretary Liam Fox or former Cabinet minister Peter Lilley “to be handed the role”. 

By now, we are getting news that Andrew Lansley has been slated for the post but, even without that, the problem with that plan is, of course, that not even a British prime minister has the power to hand anyone a role as commissioner. The Lisbon Treaty gives the EU institutions all kinds of powers to stop a Government putting an unsympathetic individual at the top of the commission.

The first hurdle is that even if Cameron were to nominate Paterson, Fox or Lilley as the replacement for Catherine Ashton, the new president of the European Commission would have been able to warn Cameron privately that he found the nominee obnoxious.

Should Cameron have persisted, the president would make it clear the nominee would be given a portfolio so obscure that after the first six months of the new commission, few in the Brussels press corps would be able to name Britain’s man at the Berlaymont. The European Council may have to agree the nominations, but the president of the commission has complete power to decide who gets which job.

If you doubt how obscure some commissioners can be, ask yourself if you have any idea who these commissioners are and what they do: Nevin Mimica, Johannes Hahn, Maire Geoghehan Quinn. Influence depends on the portfolio. The president also has the power to force the resignation of any commissioner, should an awkward Eurosceptic finally make to the “college”, as it is called, of commissioners.

The second hurdle is the European Parliament. It must be consulted on the appointment. The MEPs just love exercising this power. If any national government does not bow to their “recommendation”, the parliament has the power to reject the entire commission. In 2004, the parliament forced the Italian prime minister to withdraw his appointment of the excellent Rocco Buttiglione as commissioner.

Their reason was because the commissioner was an observant Catholic who refused to renounce his church’s teaching that homosexuality was a sin (Buttiglione had a liberal history in regard to public policy on homosexuality, but simply holding a private religious view on sin was considered a disqualification for a commissioner).

As if this was not enough, there is a third hurdle. New commissioners have to stand before the European Court of Justice and give a “solemn declaration” – in effect, take a secular oath – that they will uphold all the principles and values enshrined in the treaties (which of course includes the principle of ever-closer union and the free movement of people) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. 

The new commissioner must also promise to be independent of any government, even the government of his own country, and accept the principle of Cabinet responsibility by which the commission is run. 

What this means is that, even if Paterson, Fox or Lilley or any other Eurosceptic managed to overcome the European Parliament and make it a role as a commissioner, he would then have to stand in public and give his word to uphold the aims of the EU. 
That in turn means that Paterson-Fox-Lilley-whoever would have had to have stood in a court and give an oath to uphold ever closer union, and then stick to his word. Or he can make the “solemn declaration” in front of a court and then break his word. And what sort of a scoundrel would that make him? 
In no case can a British nominee, of whatever persuasion, “fight Britain’s corner”.  If he had any intention of doing so, he would never get the job anyway.

My thanks to Richard North for flagging up Mary-Ellen Synon’s article which is, as so often, eminently readable and sound good sense.

.
Regards,

Greg_L-W.
.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337 –
number witheld calls are blocked & calls are recorded.

Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS, >SEARCH< & >Side Bars< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I respect & almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General ‘Stuff’ archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General ‘Stuff’ ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.com

Skype: GregL-W

TWITTER: Greg_LW

.

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN
&
To Leave-The-EU
  
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

>Met Office Denial of Floods being due to Climate Change

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 15/02/2014

>Met Office Denial of Floods being due to Climate Change

.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

.

Flood fight at the Met Office

No, global warming did NOT cause the storms, says one of the Met Office’s most senior experts

One of the Met Office’s most senior experts yesterday made a dramatic intervention in the climate change debate by insisting there is no link between the storms that have battered Britain and global warming.

Mat Collins, a Professor in climate systems at Exeter University, said the storms have been driven by the jet stream – the high-speed current of air that girdles the globe – which has been ‘stuck’ further south than usual.

Professor Collins told The Mail on Sunday: ‘There is no evidence that global warming can cause the jet stream to get stuck in the way it has this winter. If this is due to climate change, it is outside our knowledge.’

His statement carries particular significance because he is an internationally acknowledged expert on climate computer models and forecasts, and his university post is jointly funded by the Met Office.

Prof Collins is also a senior adviser – a ‘co-ordinating lead author’ – for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). His statement appears to contradict Met Office chief scientist Dame Julia Slingo.

Last weekend, she said ‘all  the evidence suggests that climate change has a role to  play’ in the storms.

Prof Collins made clear that he believes it is likely global warming could lead to higher rainfall totals, because a warmer atmosphere can hold more water. But he said this has nothing to do with the storm conveyor belt.

He said that when the IPCC was compiling its Fifth Assessment Report on climate change last year, it discussed whether warming might affect the jet stream. But, he went on, ‘there was very low confidence that climate change has any effect on the jet stream getting stuck’. In the end, the possibility was not even mentioned in the report.

To read the original article CLICK HERE

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2560310/No-global-warming-did-NOT-cause-storms-says-one-Met-Offices-senior-experts.html#ixzz2tRdMB4oB

h/t to “Jabba the Cat”

Related:

Somerset Floods – February Update

UK flooding, Met Office, and all that – a map from 878AD tells us more than Slingo

For a great deal more factual material on Climate Change & Global Warming may I commend Anthony Watts’ specialist site CLICK HERE

Also I believe that the many articles on the subject and also detailed articles on the current flooding one would have to go a long way to better the various articles on Dr. Richard North’s web site CLICK HERE

Let us never forget the desperate efforts made by the warmists to show that the flooding of the Somerset Levels & the Thames as being due to their unsubstantiated and unproven theories of anthropogenic Global Warming, which is clearly bunkum as in Neolithic time the Somerset Levels extensively flooded without the help of mankind!

It is claimed that the flooding is the worst for 250 years and so it may well be as the rain is at its worst for 250 years – this is of course one of the joys or disadvantages of living on a volatile planet with a constantly changing climate influenced by plate tectonics, volcanic action and the radiation output of our nearest star which constantly is changing.

Let us not forget that for millenia it rained constantly and then emerged Pangea which drifted into Gondwanna and we seem able to trace some 29 periods of massive global warming that ended the various ice ages – thye arrogance of the warmists and the politicians that they believe that mankind can make a significant difference is staggering and even if there was a grain of truth in their theories SO WHAT the amount of difference mankind makes would be both miniscule and self correctimng as such harm we do will harm mankind diminishing our success even perhaps eradicating us from the infinite equation just as we each shall be in our turn.

It is arrogant to believe that mankind is of any consequential value to the universe and if you doubt that then may I suggest you seek out Carl Sagan’s ‘Small Blue Dot’ on You Tube and get over yourself!

.
Regards,

Greg_L-W.
.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337 –
number witheld calls are blocked & calls are recorded.

Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS, >SEARCH< & >Side Bars< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I respect & almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General ‘Stuff’ archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General ‘Stuff’ ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.com

Skype: GregL-W

TWITTER: Greg_LW

.

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN
&
To Leave-The-EU
  
 

Posted in Climate Change, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Swiss Democracy In Peril From EU Abuse & Bullying

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 10/02/2014

Swiss Democracy In Peril From EU Abuse & Bullying

.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

.
Hi,

 

following on the Swiss vote of yesterday that voted by 50.3 to curb EU immigrants, already the EU is seeking ways to corrupt Switzerland’s democracy and blackmail them into voting again to ensure they get the vote that the EU wants – which will force open borders on the Swiss and destroy their Sovereignty and the democracy that has served them so well over the years.

Ju8st as the odious and corrupt EU has done to all its vassal regions!

Let this be a lesson to scoundrels like David Cameron, Nigel Farage and tyhe like, who try to portray the EU as largely beningn in their claims that leaving the EU is not just a democratic option but as simple as passing a Bill in the long irelevant British Parliament!

NOTE how the EU is behaving within hours of the vote:

EU says to assess ties after Swiss back migrant curbs

09FEB2014
Brussels (AFP)

The European Commission said it would assess EU ties with Switzerland after the Alpine country voted Sunday to limit immigration from the European Union, its biggest trading partner by far.

“The EU will examine the implications of this initiative on EU-Swiss relations as a whole,” said a statement after Swiss results showed a narrow victory for a proposal pushed by right-wing populists.

The European Commission said it “regrets” the Swiss vote, which “goes against the principle of free movement of persons between the EU and Switzerland.”

Although Switzerland is not an EU member, it signed onto the EU accord for free movement of citizens in 1999 and implemented it from 2002.

While Sunday’s vote focused only on that issue, fall-out from the result could imperil Switzerland’s trade with the big European bloc, which its economy depends on. Brussels has already made it clear that Bern cannot cherry-pick among EU advantages.

An estimated 400,000 Swiss citizens live in the EU, many of them dual nationals, while more than a million EU citizens currently live in Switzerland.

One wonders if the Swiss will decide to change their National Anthem to CLICK HERE

On a 56% turnout of their eligible electoratye in a population of 8Million the Swiss, despite 23% having their origins as immigrants, voted by 50.3% against open borders and an automatic right if immigration for vassals of the EU.

Search as I might I can not locate figures that indicate what percentage win this is over those who were irresponsible enough to have voted to permit immigration, a figure for abstentions is not readily forthcoming!

As I warned in a Twitter much earlier the EU can be expected to try to bully and abuse Switzerland’s democracy and as AFP and other agencies show they have started early!

EU to review Swiss ties after vote curbing immigration

By Jonathan Fowler (AFP) – 2 hours ago 

GENEVA — The European Union warned it will review ties with Switzerland after the non-member Alpine country voted Sunday to restrict EU immigration in a closely-fought referendum.

Final results of the plebiscite showed 50.3 percent of voters backed the “Stop Mass Immigration” plan pushed by Swiss right-wing populists.

The fall-out from the result could sink a raft of deals with the EU, including on the economic front.

Switzerland is ringed by EU member countries and does the bulk of its trade with the 28-nation bloc, but has remained steadfast about not becoming a member.

The European Commission said it would assess EU ties with Switzerland, raising the prospect of restricted trade or other retaliatory steps.

“The EU will examine the implications of this initiative on EU-Swiss relations as a whole,” it said a statement.

EU foreign ministers were scheduled to meet Monday in Brussels but it was not clear whether the Swiss vote would be added to the agenda.

Wolfgang Schaeuble, finance minister of Germany, Switzerland’s top trade partner, said the result “is going to create plenty of problems for Switzerland in a host of areas”. But he said it was also a warning sign of European globalisation fears.

Swiss Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter said he planned to tour European capitals to explain the vote and seek a solution, starting with Berlin.

“The people are sovereign, and a healthy system doesn’t force the public to follow political authorities with outsized powers,” Burkhalter said.

The Swiss government and a broad swathe of economic lobby groups fearing the EU fall-out had battled the immigration curb plan.

But under Switzerland’s system of direct democracy, voters have the last word on a huge range of issues.

The French-language newspaper Le Temps noted how French-speaking areas and larger cities voted against the immigration curbs, while German-speaking and rural areas generally voted for them.

Hundreds of people came out to demonstrate against the referendum result in the capital Bern and in the city of Lucerne. “We are ashamed,” shouted protesters in Bern.

The Swiss government said it would examine over coming weeks how to “recast relations” with the EU, but stressed that current immigration rules would remain in place until the new ones were drawn up.

The vote obliges the government to renegotiate within three years a 2007 deal struck with Brussels that gave most EU citizens free access to the Swiss labour market.

It was one of a series of accords reached in 1999 after five years of talks that were seen as a way for Switzerland and the EU to enjoy access to each other’s markets without Switzerland having to opt for full EU membership.

Brussels, though, has warned that Switzerland cannot cherrypick from the binding package of deals, which were themselves approved in a 2000 referendum.

Besides free movement of labour, the pacts include equal access for Swiss and EU firms to public procurement tenders, smooth trade in farm goods, air transport and other sectors.

There have been warnings that ripping up those deals could also affect Switzerland’s membership of Europe’s passport-free Schengen travel zone.

It could also hit talks aimed at giving Swiss financial players more access to EU markets, and to prise open Switzerland’s banking secrecy, a hot topic as EU countries try to crack down on tax dodgers.

Such fears failed to faze the Swiss People’s Party (SVP), which piloted the referendum.

Hawkish about sovereignty, it claims the country has been swamped by migrants.

“The people have taken back their destiny over immigration,” said party ideologue Christoph Blocher, while leader Toni Brunner hailed “a turning point in our immigration policy”.

The SVP says that with 80,000 EU citizens arriving per year — more than the 8,000 predicted before the rules were liberalised — the nation of eight million people needs to apply the brakes.

It claims that EU migrants undercut Swiss workers’ salaries, and that overpopulation has driven up rents, stretched the health and education systems, and overloaded the road and rail networks.

Immigration and national identity are traditional political themes in a country with a long history of drawing foreign workers and yet some of Europe’s toughest rules for obtaining citizenship.

But over recent years, the proportion of foreigners has risen from around one-fifth of the population to roughly a quarter.

There are around a million EU citizens in Switzerland, while some 430,000 Swiss live in EU member states.

The majority of recent immigrants are from neighbouring Germany, Italy and France, as well as Portugal.

The new measure will leave it up to authorities to set quotas for foreigners’ work permits per sector.

Critics say restricting the hiring of EU citizens will hamper the Swiss economy, which enjoys virtually full employment but has an ageing population, and it could also hurt trade with a disgruntled EU.

“This is a bad result. Switzerland needs good relations with the EU,” said Paul Rechsteiner, a Socialist lawmaker and trade union official.

The national employers’ federation warned that “period of uncertainty has begun for the Swiss economy, and that is not a good thing”.

The result was hailed by eurosceptics within the EU who want to rein in immigration among its member states, notably from eastern to western Europe.

Spain’s centre-left El Pais daily said the vote “reflects the populist and xenophobic agitation sweeping the Old Continent less than three months before the European elections”.

Please note quotes from AFP are NOT permitted for commercial use.

As ever Richard North provides much detail on the subject at CLICK HERE
.
Regards,

Greg_L-W.
.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337 –
number witheld calls are blocked & calls are recorded.

Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS, >SEARCH< & >Side Bars< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I respect & almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General ‘Stuff’ archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General ‘Stuff’ ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.com

Skype: GregL-W

TWITTER: Greg_LW

.

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN
&
To Leave-The-EU
  
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Enoch Powell’s 1969 Interview with David Frost

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 09/02/2014

Enoch Powell’s 1969 Interview with David Frost

.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

.

Hi,

may I commend to you the excellent interview of Enoch Powell MP in 1969 by David Frost:

Would that we had interviewers of the caliber of David Frost, Richard Dimbleby, Robin Day & their ilk functioning in our media nowadays in Britain and had we such perhaps we would have the good fortune to have politicians and statesmen of the intellect, erudity & stature of Enoch Powell.

I guess a dumbbed-down people get the shoddy interviewers and low grade politicians they deserve!

That the peoples have been dumbbed-down is clear from the low grade output of popular & populist media and that British politicians no longer hold sway in the creation of law having surrendered that duty to the undemocratic & corrupt EU.

May I also commend to you Enoch Powell’s excellent and prescient speech during the House of Commons Debate of 25-Feb-1970 in which he warned in detail of the dangers posed by joining the EU, dangers we have now all seen to be true.
To study the speech CLICK HERE

.
Regards,

Greg_L-W.
.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337 –
number witheld calls are blocked & calls are recorded.

Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS, >SEARCH< & >Side Bars< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I respect & almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General ‘Stuff’ archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General ‘Stuff’ ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.com

Skype: GregL-W

TWITTER: Greg_LW

.

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN
&
To Leave-The-EU
  
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

ASTONISHING Minister Mark Harper MP Resigns on Ethical Grounds

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 09/02/2014

ASTONISHING Minister Mark Harper MP Resigns on Ethical Grounds

.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

.
Hi,

you may well think that the most stupid thing a Minister with responsibility for Immigration could do is employ an illegal immigrant!

Yes on the surface this is true, however Mark Harper (my MP) has fallen foul of his own laws, not due to dishonesty on his part, nor exploitation of a foreign worker but just because, as vassals of The EU without control of our borders it has become near as damn it impossible to keep up with the plethora of laws and diktats undemocratically imposed on us by the unelected dictator committee of the EU.

Yes Mark Harper fell foul of his own laws despite reasonable checks – this clearly shows that utilising the public as immigration police AND lawyers is clearly not reasonable!

Mark Harper is to be commended in that having imposed an unreasonable law, all be it to comply with EU diktat, he has had the integrity to resign, having fallen foul of his own law!

.
Dear Prime Minister

In April 2007 I took on a cleaner for my London flat. In doing so, I was very mindful of my legal and financial obligations and undertook a number of checks beforehand.
This included consideration of the HMRC tests as to whether the cleaner was performing her work under a contract for services on a self-employed basis which I concluded she was.
However, even though there was no legal requirement for me to check her right to work in the UK, I felt that it was appropriate to do so. I therefore took a copy of her passport to verify her identity and also a copy of a Home Office letter, dated 26 January 2006, which stated that she had leave to remain indefinitely in the United Kingdom, including the right to work and engage in a business.

I considered the issue again when you appointed me as a Minister in the Cabinet Office in May 2010 and concluded that as I had performed a right to work check in 2007 and that my cleaner had indefinite leave to remain in the UK no further check was necessary.
When you then appointed me as Immigration Minister in September 2012 I went through a similar consideration process and once again concluded that no further check was necessary.
In retrospect, I should have checked more thoroughly.

As I took the Immigration Bill through Parliament in autumn 2013 I talked a lot about these matters in the context both of employers and landlords. What we do, and will, require of both is that they carry out reasonable checks and take copies of documents.
We do not require them to be experts or spot anything other than an obvious forgery. Given this focus on these matters, I thought it prudent to check that all my documents were in order for my cleaner. I undertook an extensive search to locate the copies of documents I had taken but unfortunately I was unable to locate them.

As a result, in the week commencing 20 January 2014 I asked my cleaner for further copies of these documents which she provided on 4 February. On 5 February, I asked my private office to check the details with immigration officials to confirm that all was in order.
I was informed on the morning of 6 February that my cleaner did not in fact have indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom. I immediately notified the Home Secretary and my Permanent Secretary. This is now a matter for Immigration Enforcement.

Although I complied with the law at all times, I consider that as Immigration Minister, who is taking legislation through Parliament which will toughen up our immigration laws, I should hold myself to a higher standard than expected of others. I have also considered the impact on my Parliamentary colleagues, the Government and you. I have always believed that politics is a team game, not an individual sport. Under the circumstances, I have therefore decided that the right course is for me to return to the Backbenches. I am sorry for any embarrassment caused.
I am grateful for the opportunities you have given me since you became Leader of the Conservative Party, first in Opposition and then in Government. I will continue to support you as Prime Minister, the Conservative Party and this Government in whatever way I can from the backbenches. I will also continue to serve my constituents in the Forest of Dean to the best of my ability.
Yours ever,
Mark
.
You will no doubt have noted The Spectator article CLICK HERE which exposed the lack of integrity, when it comes to immigration laws, of Ed Milliband and his party:
It would be wrong, though, to think of Labour as a totally happy ship at the moment. There is the row over the visa status of Arnie Graf, the American community organiser and a close ally of Miliband. Graf’s friends think rivals inside the Labour machine deliberately leaked the news that he had no work permit in an effort to undermine him. Miliband’s confidants, by contrast, think the leak was designed to embarrass Iain McNicol, who as the party’s general secretary might would be hurt most by any administrative failure.
Our MP Mark Harper has it seems reintroduced the ethical and honourable concept of ‘an honourable resignation’.

Whether Mark Harper’s action catches on as a concept is however a very questionable point, as shown by the failure of any in Labour to resign over the utter mess they made of the economy that has left Britain suffering a prolonged period of austerity, which will get massively tougher if we are to avoid what is even thus likely bankruptcy.

Ethics were are so rare these days that a blind eye is turned to Milliband’s ducking the law just as Neither Tony Blair, nor Gordon Brown, nor Jack Straw nor any of their cabinet have stood trial for their overt and deliberate lies to the British peoples, Parliament and our allies in The UN nor the publication of an utterly dishonest and corrupt report on Iraq stolen from an Iraqi student at Berkley California and knowingly peddled as ‘British Intelligence’ for which Tony Blair’s puppet John Scarlet was rewartded for his lies with a Knighthood!

One wonders if Blair, Brown, Straw and the rest of that evil Cabinet will ever be called to account for their lies, war crimes and crimes against humanity, let alone have the integrity to resign!

Regards,

Greg_L-W.

First Published at CLICK HERE

.
Regards,

Greg_L-W.
.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337 –
number witheld calls are blocked & calls are recorded.

Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS, >SEARCH< & >Side Bars< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I respect & almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General ‘Stuff’ archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General ‘Stuff’ ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.com

Skype: GregL-W

TWITTER: Greg_LW

.

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN
&
To Leave-The-EU
  
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

For Disaster Take Somerset Levels + EU Directives + Water then Obfuscate

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 05/02/2014

For Disaster Take Somerset Levels + EU Directives + Water then Obfuscate

.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

.

 EU policy: “just add water”

 Wednesday 5 February 2014

 

000a dredger-005.JPG

 

Last night, I had a very long talk with an elected member of one of Somerset’s drainage boards, a man with a farm close to the centre of the floods, who has been serving on the drainage board for over 20 years, and who has intimate knowledge of local conditions.

One reason for talking was to clear up the confusion as to whether dredging was stopped on the Somerset Levels when the Environment Agency took over, to which the answer is “yes” and “no”.

Responsibility for dredging on the Levels is split between the Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs) and the EA, the former clearing the “ordinary watercourses” while the EA does the “main rivers” – those designated as such by Defra.

According to my source, when Barbara Young took over as chief executive of the Agency in 2000, she stopped the routine dredging of the main rivers, although the IDBs continued their dredging programmes. Thus, some dredging was carried out right up until the current floods.

What seems to have happened is that the deterioration was initially slow to manifest itself. But, once it set in, as the silt burden increases, flow is hampered slowing down the flow and increasing the silting, setting up a spiral of decline.

Why Young was so keen to see this happen is illustrated by a piece in the Guardian in 1 February 2008, devoted to the celebration of wetlands.

Wetlands have a problem, the piece said. Because they are usually in low-lying areas, and easily accessible, they are prime targets for development. By draining a wetland, and building homes, roads and factories, a nation may boost its economic performance; but this is almost always at the expense of biodiversity.

Yet, we were told, it’s not all bad news. Uniquely, wetlands can be created – or recreated – much more quickly and easily than other vital habitats such as ancient woodlands, hedgerows or rainforest. Then came the “money quote” from Young, still chief executive of the Environment Agency. “Just add water!”, she said.

Undisclosed, of course, was that Young was by then seeking to meet the requirements of the Habitats Directive, and the targets set under the EU’s Natura 2000 programme, as well as the requirements of the Floods Directive, which required the “restoration of floodplains”.

In effect, allowing the Somerset Levels to flood was one of the quickest and cheapest (for the Environment Agency) ways of creating new “habitat” to satisfy EU demands.

The naivety of the politicians on this, though, is wondrous to behold. Only a few days ago, we had John Redwood observe of the BBC Today programme:

They should first have explored the issue of whether it is a deliberate policy of the Agency to allow large parts of the country to be flooded, as they seem to wish to restore old landscape prior to the draining of the land to create homes and farms for people. It appears from various EA statements that they do hanker after more wetlands and fewer farms and homes in certain areas.

That, of course, is the case. The flooding is the result of deliberate policy, mandated by EU law. These are “designer floods”, made to order.

To justify them in its own terms, though, the EA has undergone some elaborate financial manipulation to demonstrate that reverting to “nature” is cost effective. To do so, it artificially inflates the cost of flood prevention maintenance, while downplaying the costs incurred through flooding.

An example was given by my Drainage Board source. To dredge a 1.2-mile section of the Parrett, they got a quote of £7,500. For five miles dredging of the same river, the Environment Agency claims it will cost £4 million. By then assessing the economic cost of flooding agricultural land as zero, it is then very easy to show that flood prevention is not “cost effective”.

Not least of the problems is the disposal of the dredged spoil. Under EU rules, it can be placed on the bank side but if it is double-handled – i.e., moved again – it becomes controlled waste and must be removed to landfill at a cost of £140 per cubic metre.

To overcome this problem, the drainage board is very keen on using a suction dredger. Cutter-suction machines such as the one illustrated – with smaller versions available – are the perfect answer, as the spoil can be pumped some distance from the dredging site without falling foul of EU rules.

From the EA’s own studies, we can now see that dredging would have bee highly effective in reducing the extent and duration of the floods, despite the previous assertions that it could not be justified on financial grounds.

The trouble is that, until the water subsides, it is very difficult to get a dredger in to do the work. For Barbara Young to “just add water” was all too easy. Getting it back out again is another matter.

To view the original Article CLICK HERE

For more on this subject search this site
&

Also CLICK HERE & Search the site for more info.

.
Regards,

Greg_L-W.
.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337 –
number witheld calls are blocked & calls are recorded.

Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS, >SEARCH< & >Side Bars< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I respect & almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General ‘Stuff’ archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General ‘Stuff’ ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.com

Skype: GregL-W

TWITTER: Greg_LW

.

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN
&
To Leave-The-EU
  
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

DELIBERATE Flooding of Somerset Levels to suit EU Wetland Quota

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 04/02/2014

DELIBERATE Flooding of Somerset Levels to suit EU Wetland Quota

.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

.
Hi,

so you though the flooding of the Somerset Levels was due to heavy rain – you may have thought it was due to cutting cash for dredging but perhaps the facts will help you understand it is deliberate to comply with EU regulations to ensure that Britain doesn’t get massive EU fines for reducing the area of wetlands!

Note how the Green idiots demand an ‘environmental officer’ to check everyspoonfull dredged to ensure it doesn’t contain some worm or other or maybe even a newt – IF it does then there is a risk of all dredging and pumping being halted!

The lack of dredging etc. is being used as the excuse with value given to agricultural flooded land at a very low figure whilst the so called environment agency quotes inflated costs for dredging and maintenance – hand the job back to the river authorities who can do the job for around £750,000 a mile of drainage river dredged and maintained as opposed to the environment agencies quoted £$M per 2 miles!

 

See various article on Dr. Richard North’s blog:

http://www.eureferendum.com

 

Central Somerset Gazette are catching up!

‘Somerset flooding was EU plan all along’

By IanMat  |  Posted: February 04, 2014

‘Somerset flooding was EU plan all along’ claims commentator and blogger Richard North

THE EUROPEAN UNION intended for the Somerset Levels to flood, claims political commentator and blogger Richard North.

Mr North runs his Defence of the Realm and EU Referendum blogs and was a former research director in the European Parliament.

It is all very well for Chris Smith, Chairman of the Environment Agency, to prattle on about “difficult choices”, and to tell us that “more must be done to protect the Somerset Levels”. But in the flooding crisis over which he is presiding, there is one which Smith’s Agency, at the behest of the EU, deliberately allowed to happen.

Allowing the flooding is a matter EU policy, introduced by a 2007 Directive and consciously adopted by the Environment Agency in 2008, which then sought to increase the frequency of flooding on the Somerset Levels.

Related articles

What then makes it impossible for the people on the spot, like Owen Paterson, is that they are having to deal with decisions made years ago. Only now are the consequences of those decisions becoming evident, while the people (or agencies) who contributed to this disaster are entirely invisible.

In the “invisible” class is that classic elephant in the room, the European Union, which was behind the last great change in British strategy, heralded by a Defra consultation document in July 2004 called “making space for water”, introducing “a new Government strategy for flood and coastal erosion risk management in England”.

The clue as to its provenance came on page 23, under the heading “European Dimension”, which told us that flood risk management was being discussed at the EU level, and the themes under discussion were “all consistent with this consultation and the current approach in England”.

The outline of the EU approach had in fact been published in a COM final, (2004)472, the very same month as the Defra document, signalling the “European” interest and warning of further activity to come.

At the time, Charles Clover, writing in the Telegraph was very far from being impressed. He complained that, while Defra calls it “Making Space for Water”, others called it “flooding”. And, in those few words, the future government policy was revealed. Flood defence was to give way to “management”.

Government consultation continued into 2005, making it very clear that a “new strategic direction” was involved, one which involved changing the emphasis from flood protection to allowing certain areas to flood.

For Somerset, this had already been spelled out in an EU-funded conference in Warsaw in 2003. Flood defence for farm land, along with high levels of subsidies, was for many years an important element of Britain’s production-orientated agricultural policy, wrote the authors. Many floodplain areas benefited from publicly-funded flood defence and land drainage schemes which reduced crop damage and facilitated a change to more intensive farming systems.

Recently, however, they continued, policy emphasis has been placed on environmental enhancement, on greater diversity of economic activity as a basis for sustainable rural livelihoods, and on public enjoyment of the countryside. Funds previously committed to support farm output are increasingly diverted to encourage land managers to deliver environmental benefits.

In this context, we were told, there is reduced justification for high standards of flood defence for agriculture. Indeed, there may be substantial benefits if some floodplain land is returned to its previous unprotected, un-drained condition.

Therein lay the death knell for the Somerset Levels, as a new term was to dominate policy: “Washland”. This was an area of the floodplain that was to be allowed to flood or was deliberately flooded by a watercourse for flood management purposes.

Unacknowledged by either government, the media or even Chris Smith in his current diatribe, this policy was given legislative force, not by the Westminster parliament but by an EU directive 2007/60/EC of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks.

There, in recital 14, we saw spelled out the requirement that flood risk management plans should focus on prevention, protection and preparedness. But, “with a view to giving rivers more space, they should consider where possible the maintenance and/or restoration of floodplains, as well as measures to prevent and reduce damage to human health, the environment, cultural heritage and economic activity”.

There, writ large, was Defra’s “making space for water” policy and all that was needed for an already Green-dominated Environment Agency to abandon the Somerset Levels.

The shift in policy can be seen with brutal clarity on the Coimmission website which gives priority to the “environment”, citing a raft of EU measures, including the Water Framework Directive, the Habitats Directive, the Environmental Impact Assessment and the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive. The Floods Directive, we are sternly warned, has to be implemented by 2015.

Just so that there should be no doubts as to where the policy thrust law, DG Environment in 2011 issued a note, stressing that flood risk management “should work with nature, rather than against it”, building up the “green infrastructure” and thus offering a “triple-win” which included restoration (i.e., flooding) of the floodplain.

By then, the Environment Agency needed no encouragement. In its March 2008 plan it had decided that, “providing a robust economic case for maintenance works on the Somerset Levels and Moors remains a challenge” (p.131).

We believe, the Agency said, that “it is appropriate to look again at the benefits derived from our work, particularly focussing more on the infrastructure and the environmental benefits, which previous studies have probably [been] underestimated”.

We have, they said, “international obligations to maintain and enhance the habitats and species in the Somerset Levels and Moors, and it is within this context that all decisions have to be made”.

And, with that, they were “doubtful that all the pumping stations on the Somerset Levels and Moors are required for flood risk management purposes. Many pumping stations are relatively old and in some cases difficult to maintain. It is necessary to decide which ones are necessary particularly in the context of redistributing water”.

Of six policy options, the Agency thus adopted the sixth, to: “Take action to increase the frequency of flooding to deliver benefits locally or elsewhere, which may constitute an overall flood risk reduction”. This policy option, they said, “involves a strategic increase in flooding in allocated areas” (p.141). The Levels were to be allowed to flood, as a matter of deliberate policy.

Thus, when the BBC reported that the government had been “slow to act”, it could not have been more wrong. It had been there years before, planning to make the disaster that has overtaken the people of that part of Somerset a routine occurrence, not so much man-made as made by government.

By the time Owen Peterson arrived to try to deal with the situation, he was years too late. Between the EU, the previous Labour government and the Environment Agency, the damage had already been done..

To view the original article CLICK HERE

.
Regards,

Greg_L-W.
.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337 –
number witheld calls are blocked & calls are recorded.

Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS, >SEARCH< & >Side Bars< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I respect & almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General ‘Stuff’ archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General ‘Stuff’ ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.com

Skype: GregL-W

TWITTER: Greg_LW

.

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN
&
To Leave-The-EU
  
 

Posted in Floods, Somerset Flooding | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: