Saturday, 5 December 2009

Prove it!

Now my point here, just to be clear is not about the merits of "drink driving" legislation its about the self determination of a Sovereign sate to determine its own legislation.
MSM (Main Stream Media) still have a long way to go if and I quote "Plans to review permitted alcohol levels for drivers would have no impact on criminally irresponsible individuals who routinely drive while well over the limit," says The Telegraph leader. "It is therefore puzzling that Lord Adonis, the Transport Secretary, wants to reopen this debate,"

Deary deary me when are these people (reporters) going to wake up to the single most important FACT that we are ruled by the EU Commission in Brussels now!

NO…….it isn't “puzzling” – it isn't “puzzling” at all. This is an EU led initiative. As we all know, police at the moment in the UK can only demand a breath test if they have "reasonable suspicion" (usually erratic driving) that a driver has been consuming alcohol.

Even The Home Office, which insists that random tests are not an efficient way of catching drink-drivers. does not see a need for them to be introduced. However – and here is the crunch - the president of Tispol, the European Traffic Police Network, said the commission would attempt to make its recommendation a directive if it is not followed.

Says Ad Hellemons, also Dutch Assistant Commissioner of Police, talking to BBC Radio Five Live Five: "This is the first time the European Commission has made such a recommendation. The vast majority of member states already carry out random breath tests. We can’t understand why governments would want to protect drink-drivers".

"The European Commission has made it clear that they expect this recommendation to be followed. If not they will try to make it a directive". So there you have it – you will do as we "recommend", or we will make it LAW.

However, there is even more to this than the headline story makes out. In fact, quietly and very much behind the scenes, the EU has been conducting wide-ranging studies on road traffic law enforcement for many years.

Between 1998–2002, as part of the European fourth framework programme (DG TREND), information was gathered and assessed concerning police enforcement strategies and effects throughout Europe for the EU research project ESCAPE (Enhanced Safety Coming from Appropriate Police Enforcement).

This "ESCAPE" project was itself a follow-on from another EU project called GADGET, funded under the "4th Framework Programme project", with the sinister title of "Legal measures and enforcement". This and other EU projects "prepare the groundwork for implementing Europe-wide demonstration projects in enforcement".

It goes right back to May 2004 when the EU decided it wanted common drink-driving limits. Only, instead of coming out in the open, as any accountable democracy would do, therefore subjecting any proposal to scrutiny and debate it is pushing for each member state "voluntarily" to impose harmonised standards, and only then will it issue a Directive, ~(ergo EU LAW) claiming that this is simply to regularise and standardise a position that already exists. For that is how our masters Le Commission work!

The EU commission is well-aware that bringing out a harmonising Directive at this stage so early after the ratification of Lisbon would trigger a huge wave of protest and anti-EU sentiment, so it is working behind the scenes, as always with a veiled threat that, unless the member states comply "voluntarily" it will push for a new law (i.e. Directive)

The whole agenda was set out in 2002 (138 pages .pdf) - the project called "ESCAPE", which plans EU-wide traffic law harmonisation and common enforcement standards. (Any bets on how long before we have to drive on the right side of the road and have KMPH speed signs) This drink-drive limit is only one of the proposals. Standard speed limits, random (without evidence of suspicion) breath-testing and uniform fines are all proposed.

As always, though, the so called "newspapers" (ergo MSM) cannot see what is in front of their very noses – hence the leader writer finding the current government action "puzzling". These so called “reporters” are babes in arms when it comes to understanding how our government now based in Brussels works.

And still the boy Cameron thinks we are better served by being “in” than “out”


No comments:

Post a Comment