Citizenship and the EU

You know, I often find myself wondering about this. I've said before that as soon as I'm eligible I will apply for Canadian Citizenship, and this remains my intent. The question being; do I wish to remain a citizen of the UK, and thus a citizen of Europe? Will I want to maintain dual citizenship status? While I don't, and have never really minded the notion of being a citizen of Europe, I don't like the way a closed circle of unaccountable politicians and bureaucrats are taking it.

When a torrent of micro managing regulation goes onto the statute books without so much as a bye, leave, or thank you. Then I don't want to be a citizen of the EU. If legislation can be cut and pasted from directives originating from within the undemocratic cancer that is the EU Commission without so much as a sneeze from the elected body. Then I don't want to be a part of the European Union. When I watch the insane debt bubble looming over the countries that are part of the Euro, then I think I'd be better off not being a citizen of the EU.

Don't get me wrong, I love Europe. All of it. I love most of the places, and most of the people I've met on my travels. Germany, Italy, France, Spain, Netherlands, Luxemburg, and yes, even Belgium. I'm sure a lot of Germans, Italians, French, Spanish, Dutch, Luxemburgers and Belgians feel exactly the same way.

There are things that are done far better in Europe than the English do. The TGV's (Ironically, many engine and coach units built by British Manufacturers) that zip across France and Spain. Much more comfortable than flying. European Motorways, and I have many fond memories of French N and D routes. Airports.

My head is crammed with delightful European memories like the almost overpowering liquorice tinged smell of Basil on the road from Florence to Genoa. The dusty glory of a Tuscan summer. Champagne cellar tours in Rheims, the dazzling brilliance of the Mont Blanc glacier on a sunny day. The dusty expanse of the Saarland and Rhine Valley in midsummer. Little family roadside restaurants off the beaten track. People who readily forgave my poor language skills, but didn't mind so long as I made some effort (However awkward) to speak their language.

The sheer weight of european history and culture is tremendous and never less than impressive. Yet all that is good in Europe is slowly dying of bureaucratic poisoning. A stolid, boneheaded, ignorant top down political delusion that assumes one code of law will do for all. If it were general law, like don't steal or don't cheat, I'd be all for it, but what bugs me is the increasing micro management foisted upon the majority by vocal lobby groups. Chair polishing time wasters passing law after law without any real thought for the consequences. A system of governance that reduces the rights of the individual to whatever largesse an overweening state can be bothered to hand out. With every new piece of legislation the system becomes ever more inflexible.

To compare; in general terms of materials science, the stiffer a substance becomes, which mostly mean becoming more tightly grained, the more fragile and prone to shattering it becomes. So it is with law. The more constricting and inflexible law becomes, an increasing number of people keep will slamming into it until a social critical mass is reached, and something has to give. At that point either the edifice collapses under it's own internal pressure, or enough people get together to form a hammer. As is happening right now throughout the Middle East at present where tired, inflexible regimes are cracking under the strain. The EU are interfering because that's where most of their oil comes from. Yet their interference is actually making things worse.

For example; outside intervention is giving Gaddaffi's main power base, his alliance of tribes something to rally against. Where he might have slunk off to Venezuela with a couple of billion in unmarked bills in times past, that door has been shut to him. With no exit strategy he has to fight. More Libyans will die because of it. All because of short sighted, posturing EU intervention. I do not support this, nor do I agree with what is happening within the EU. Not too chuffed about Canada being dragged in, but that's NATO for you.

There is no course of remedial democratic action open to me. My UK MP is a buffoonish rubber stamp who does not care about his constituents views. My UK MEP is so remote and unaccountable that they might as well be located out in Lunar Orbit. Therefore I do not want to be a citizen of an enlarged EU.

At some time in the next three years I'm going to have to make a decision about citizenship. If, once a full citizen of Canada I renounce my citizenship of the UK, and thus Europe, if I get stuck in Europe for any legal reason I will always have the option of deportation back to my new home. Yet if I have dual citizenship, that choice might not be so readily open to me, and any protections I might have as a Canadian citizen might be somewhat diluted.

The Canadians look after their citizens, you see. The tacit constitutional contract between state and individual is largely intact over here. You have to really want citizenship, and therefore it's not an easy road to travel. That is where its value lies.

Upon sober reflection I think I'll have to plot this one through carefully. It has been said that those who wish to give up citizenship of the UK should undergo a psychiatric evaluation. But what is insane about wanting to renounce a country that has changed the terms and conditions of citizenship without consultation, leaves sizeable tranches of its populace effectively disenfranchised, where people can be imprisoned without trial, their families dismantled, yet has the effrontery to describe itself as 'democratic?'

From where I stand at present, with no other door open to me, the renunciation of everything I was brought up to believe in may be the most potent protest I can lodge.

Maastricht and Lisbon

A small penny dropped this afternoon. Perhaps it's just me being thick and getting the joke long after the punchline, but the thought occurs that both the Treaty of Maastricht and the Treaty of Lisbon were signed and ratified by UK Prime Ministers who had taken over from the previous incumbent without a general election to give them a proper mandate.

Major who took over from Thatcher signed the Maasstricht treaty.

Brown who had his Buggins turn after Blair signed the Lisbon treaty.

Gentlemen (and of course non male gentlefolk) draw your conclusions. Could both treaties be invalidated on these grounds? Probably not, but we can wish. can't we?

Biggest joke is Soros trying to shoehorn Brown into the top IMF job. I think Soros must want the IMF to collapse. Because such an event is certain with such a complete fiscal idiot as Brown at the helm. Or has Soros lost so big on the flatlining Carbon futures market that he's desperate to make money some other way? Mm-hm.

Shutting down

Saw the news via Bishop Hill that the European Carbon Exchange has been closed due to widespread fraud. Considering that the Chicago equivalent has been flatlined at 5 cents a tonne for some time and much of its staff laid off for the past six months, I'm not surprised.

You have to be pretty hard of critical thinking to buy into the whole Carbon-Dioxide-as-pollution meme anyway. As for altering the climate? Well, read up on major climate / weather events and their variability throughout recorded history and you'll understand.

A lot of people have talked and written landfill loads of scare stories. Some quite 'eminent' people too. For CO2 to behave as they claim, the molecule would have to act like a half silvered mirror when reflecting / absorbing heat energy. In considerably higher proportions than the trace gas levels currently present in our atmosphere. The so called 'Noble' gases, especially Argon, have a significantly higher percentage presence in Earth's atmosphere than CO2 at 0.934% (Almost 3 times the level of CO2).

So, a scheme to 'sell pollution' is suspended. Well, it's a start.

Well screw you too....

Apparently, according to Jo Nova's blog, there's an EU Directive to the effect that if other countries do not take on the whole Cap 'n Trade / Emissions Trading malarkey by 2012 then their airlines will not be allowed in EU airspace.

This is intelligent isn't it? Or rather it's life Jim, but not as we know it. In order to enter EU airspace, Airlines will have to purchase a 'Licence to pollute', the cost of which they will pass on to the travelling, importing / exporting rest of humanity. Great say I, another pointless increase in the cost of getting around. Another witless and unnecessary bar to commerce. No doubt other countries will demand some kind of reciprocal agreement, charging European Airlines a fee to enter their airspace. Guess who gets handed the bill? Us. The travelling plebs. As usual.

There are so many things wrong with this Directive, that it makes me sweat just to think about it. Mind you, I can see the opportunities too.

Say the EU is stupid enough to implement this half assed nonsense, would other countries reciprocate with their own ban on EU aircraft? The USA and Canada might, which means some kind of halfway house would need to be established where airlines from North America and Europe could land and transfer. Iceland maybe? Great for the Icelanders as they would get to rake in all those juicy landing fees from both sides of the pond. Not to mention the stopovers. Not so good for those with business or holiday homes either side of the Atlantic. Are you a UK citizen with a holiday home near Disneyworld? Oh dear. The cost / logistics of flying will get more complicated / expensive from 2012 onwards.

Thinking about it, there must be vested interests from Frankfurt to Paris desperate to recoup their losses on Carbon Trading, which at the last look was pretty much flatlining. Especially over at the Chicago Exchange, which laid half it's staff off earlier this summer. One suspects that the situation in Europe isn't that much better. If a market crashes from say $7 per unit to .05 a unit inside eighteen months, then someone, somewhere has lost big time. I understand the carbon trading market is heavily subsidised, although I'm not sure how much sense that makes, economically speaking; yet sometime a line has to be drawn under a project. A decision has to be made not to waste any more money on a dead duck, but threatening this kind of ban is like pointing a 12 Gauge shotgun at your own foot and loosing off both barrels.

Last night Mrs S and I were watching a documentary about Ireland, and she pointed at the screen and said; "Bill, that's where we're going for our Wedding Anniversary." At the time I agreed with enthusiasm. This morning, I'm not so sure.