Displace coal and reduce carbon footprint?
https://dub119.mail.live.com/default.aspx#n=992449898&fid=91418cbd74114e1a90fbc774edd49815&mid=95c6f075-e026-11e2-a559-00237de4a7e6&fv=1
Showing posts with label oil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label oil. Show all posts
Friday, 28 June 2013
Sunday, 21 April 2013
Cohesion against the madness of wind as a significant energy source
There are a plethora of anti- wind energy groups.
Some wonder why they are not better co-ordinated and why a new political party has, despite being little more than a group of single issue lobbyists, has registered?
Don't be confused - the ant-wind lobbies are all united together against wind energy; they have a strong message and Scotland Against Spin does quite well in reaching out to them all.
As they all, however, lack political clout, some have formed a party. That doesn't solve the wider issue, because the new party's policies are inept.
The reason for the lack of proper clout lies in the persistence of political loyalties amongst the lobbyists. This makes it difficult for the various groups to present a single clear political message.
So, for most part, they proclaim the need to be "non aligned" in order to keep folk on board.
No one who is truly active on any political issue, however, can be wholly devoid of a party political view or avoid a party preference; for the thinking majority, innate and natural party loyalties are hard to drop.
It is impossible to divide one's soul between a blind loyalty and a conflicting political objective. So there in the unspoken coalition of supporters of all parties (all but UKIP supporters) in which each member silently bears the dilemma that the party for whom loyalty is felt, does in practise support, promote and implement the abhorrent wind energy polices.
The question is, can "non-alignment" defeat the dynamics of that dilemma? Need it? Will the dilemma lead to much, or continual, repositioning?
When the opportunity to have an impact greater than simple objection and protest arrives, that is, when standing at the ballot box, each individual will have to face down their own demons.
Will they vote then for undying loyalties that promote wind and accept the drive from the EU, or will they think afresh and vote for UKIP, against both the stupidity of wind as a significant energy source, and against the continued subjugation of the UK to EU rules?
We will have to wait to see what they do on the day. In the meantime Salmond sails on, the Coalition continues dodging, and the EU seems unassailable. A huge rise in UKIP members and poll support for our clear message could, however, shock the incumbents into policy change.
Some wonder why they are not better co-ordinated and why a new political party has, despite being little more than a group of single issue lobbyists, has registered?
Don't be confused - the ant-wind lobbies are all united together against wind energy; they have a strong message and Scotland Against Spin does quite well in reaching out to them all.
As they all, however, lack political clout, some have formed a party. That doesn't solve the wider issue, because the new party's policies are inept.
The reason for the lack of proper clout lies in the persistence of political loyalties amongst the lobbyists. This makes it difficult for the various groups to present a single clear political message.
So, for most part, they proclaim the need to be "non aligned" in order to keep folk on board.
No one who is truly active on any political issue, however, can be wholly devoid of a party political view or avoid a party preference; for the thinking majority, innate and natural party loyalties are hard to drop.
It is impossible to divide one's soul between a blind loyalty and a conflicting political objective. So there in the unspoken coalition of supporters of all parties (all but UKIP supporters) in which each member silently bears the dilemma that the party for whom loyalty is felt, does in practise support, promote and implement the abhorrent wind energy polices.
The question is, can "non-alignment" defeat the dynamics of that dilemma? Need it? Will the dilemma lead to much, or continual, repositioning?
When the opportunity to have an impact greater than simple objection and protest arrives, that is, when standing at the ballot box, each individual will have to face down their own demons.
Will they vote then for undying loyalties that promote wind and accept the drive from the EU, or will they think afresh and vote for UKIP, against both the stupidity of wind as a significant energy source, and against the continued subjugation of the UK to EU rules?
We will have to wait to see what they do on the day. In the meantime Salmond sails on, the Coalition continues dodging, and the EU seems unassailable. A huge rise in UKIP members and poll support for our clear message could, however, shock the incumbents into policy change.
Tuesday, 5 February 2013
EU OIL GRAB - UK/SCOTLAND BEWARE!
IMMEDIATE
Not only the SNP but the whole Scottish Nation has to wake up to the realities of sovereignty.
Mr Salmond wants out of the UK and into the EU - Amendment 63 to the Fisheries' Policy should wake him up. It is a the clear intention of the EU body politic to take full central control of, basically, everything. Here that foreign collective bureaucracy wants to sneak in central sovereign control of our sea bed - UK or Scottish, whatever the result of the Scottish Referendum
That means the EU is staging a oil grab - and a lot more.
Scotland ; wake up! We need a United Kingdom that has wrestled itself free from the central control of the EU body politic. There is no such thing as Independence in the EU, Alex. And the UK itself is in the same trap. We most certainly would be Better Together and Better of Out - and UKIP alone, it seems, offers that."
NOTES
Skype: gawain.towler1
http://www.efdgroup.eu/
http://www.ukip.org
http://englandexpects.blogspot.com/
www.twitter.com/gawain.towler1
Not only the SNP but the whole Scottish Nation has to wake up to the realities of sovereignty.
Mr Salmond wants out of the UK and into the EU - Amendment 63 to the Fisheries' Policy should wake him up. It is a the clear intention of the EU body politic to take full central control of, basically, everything. Here that foreign collective bureaucracy wants to sneak in central sovereign control of our sea bed - UK or Scottish, whatever the result of the Scottish Referendum
That means the EU is staging a oil grab - and a lot more.
Scotland ; wake up! We need a United Kingdom that has wrestled itself free from the central control of the EU body politic. There is no such thing as Independence in the EU, Alex. And the UK itself is in the same trap. We most certainly would be Better Together and Better of Out - and UKIP alone, it seems, offers that."
NOTES
EU threatens Essential Sovereignty:
Time for that Referendum Dave?
Hidden in an amendment within a huge report on the EU’s Common Fisheries policy, UKIP has discovered an attempt by Brussels to seize control of the UK seabed, owned by the UK Crown: A power grab that should trigger a UK Referendum.
The vast majority of the mineral rich seabed, inside the 12 mile limit of British Territorial Waters, is Crown Estate, or property of the Crown and the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall.
Yet Amendment 63 would permit the EU to claim ownership via a direct power grab, without any consultation or prior approval from British people, the British Parliament or the Queen.
Under David Cameron’s “Referendum Lock” this should be subject to a direct appeal to British voters.
Speaking in the debate in Strasbourg this morning, Stuart Agnew MEP, the UKIP fisheries spokesman, said of the amendment, tabled by a Spanish MEPs,
"The British people, Parliament and Her Majesty the Queen will also be alarmed to discover that Amendment 63 would create a new power without a word of objection by Her Majesty's Government or the Tories.
“That power is sovereignty over the seabed as opposed to merely controlling the fish in the water above it. Any new power must mean a UK referendum.
“Therefore if this amendment is carried it must be the subject of a UK referendum under Mr Cameron's ‘referendum lock’.”
Later Mr Agnew said, “If this legislation is passed, then Cameron is duty bound to give us that vote under his own law”.
Notes
Statement by David Cameron, 25/5/2010
“My Government will introduce legislation to ensure that in future this Parliament and the British people have their say on any proposed transfer of powers to the European Union.”
The amendment
Amendment 63
Proposal for a regulation
Part I – Article 5 –indent 1
Text proposed by the Commission
|
Amendment
|
– ‘Union waters’ means the waters under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of the Member States with the exception of the waters adjacent to the territories listed in Annex II to the Treaty;
|
– ‘Union waters’ means the waters and the seabed under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of the Member States with the exception of those adjacent to the territories listed in Annex II to the Treaty;
|
Justification
In order to include sessile species.
Video of Speech by Stuart Agnew
Gawain Towler
Press Officer
EFD Group in the European Parliament
UK Independence Party
Press Officer
EFD Group in the European Parliament
UK Independence Party
Tel: +44 (0)207 2229365
GSM: +44 (0) 7879339509 Skype: gawain.towler1
http://www.efdgroup.eu/
http://www.ukip.org
http://englandexpects.blogspot.com/
www.twitter.com/gawain.towler1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)