Tag Archive: Euroopean Union

More “misinformation”?

Until today the only examples of “misinformation” on matters EU, of which I was aware, came from politicians and the media. “Misinformation” can be classified as producing articles, or making speeches, which contain false information, ie lying; or being guilty of “misinformation” by the deliberate omission of facts which do not support the argument being made.

Courtesy of @PurpleRevolutio on Twitter my attention has been drawn to an article which has appeared on the London School of Economics website by Dr. Jóhanna Jónsdóttir, a Policy Officer, European Free Trade Association Secretariat. She also contributed written evidence to the inquiry by the Foreign Affairs Committee hearing into the Future of the European Union.

As will be seen from both the article and the written submission, Dr. Jónsdóttir maintains that:

“The EEA Agreement allows some access to the Commission’s expert groups and comitology committees but no formal access to either the Parliament or the Council. The fact that the EFTA parties to the EEA Agreement do not have a seat at the table means that their impact is undoubtedly limited.”

Nowhere in either the article nor the written submission is mention made that Norway, as a member of United Nation bodies – such as the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) – does have a voice in the formulation of policy long before it reaches the European Union.

The attention of readers is drawn to the fact that while the written submission was made last year, prior to Norway refusing to implement the Third Postal Directive, the article is dated today.

One can but wonder why a Policy Officer from the European Free Trade Association Secretariat in Brussels, which is responsible for the management of the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement should feel the need to be economical with the actualité.

 


Share
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow
twitterrsstwitterrss

2013
01/17

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:



COMMENTS:
Comments Closed

The problem with the European Union

On the basis that “the old ones are the best ones” where humour is concerned, a step back in time:

34-34690158

May 29, 2005: when French voters rejected a referendum to decide whether France should ratify the proposed Constitution of the European Union. “Europe would work better without all these Europeans”.

A statement to which they are now adding: “and the bloody Brits!”.

For years, Patrick Chappatte has commented on events inside and outside Switzerland. His work is published in Swiss and international media including the International Herald Tribune, Le Temps and the Neue Zürcher Zeitung am Sonntag.

Ack: Swissinfo.


Share
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow
twitterrsstwitterrss

Read, Mark, Learn and inwardly digest!

Richard North, EUReferendum, has a post that should quite properly be considered a “lecture, but one written rather than spoken” because of its informative content. In this post Richard North explains from where legislation derives and how, in respect of the European Union, it becomes a Directive, Regulation or Decision.

Bearing in mind the wealth of information in Richard’s post, when one listens to David Cameron, during PMQs, responding to MP’s questions – and the questions themselves – one has to ask whether those in what has most assuredly become a “comedic arena” actually realize how ineffective they are. How many MPs truly understand the origin of laws they debate and about which they complain?

In the preceding post, this point about lack of knowledge among our political class was most amply illustrated by the question put and the response of David Cameron, which showed that Cameron had not only misled the public, but also misled Parliament. There is no bigger crime a politician can commit than to mislead Parliament, yet it is most noticeable that not one MP picked-up on this, neither did one member of the journalistic “sect”; and, even more noticeable, by not one “know-all” among our political commentators.

And George Eustice (see preceding post) wants more opportunity for politicians to communicate with us? Are we not misled and thereby lied to sufficiently that the last thing we need is more of the same?

Just asking…………….


Share
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow
twitterrsstwitterrss

Hosted By PDPS Internet Hosting

© Witterings from Witney 2012