#eurosceptic

EU climate emergency vote is way worse than you think

What took the group thinking EU so long? What better way to justify more taxation and wealth redistribution than to declare a “climate emergency”? What you are about to read is a perfect explanation of how little credibility exists in the European Parliament (EuroParl).

In black and white, EuroParl noted,

EU countries should at least double their contributions to the international Green Climate Fund, Parliament says. EU member states are the largest providers of public climate finance and the EU’s budget should fully comply with its international commitments. They also note that pledges by developed countries do not meet the collective goal of 100 billion USD per year as of 2020…Finally, they urgently call on all EU countries to phase out all direct and indirect fossil fuel subsidies by 2020.

Now, this is where it gets curious. Take a look at this file (from page 8) and ask yourself, how many amendments to resolutions within the “climate emergency” conversation were rejected supporting the overall declaration passing 429 in favour, 215 against, 19 abstaining?

Here is one amendment that was rejected 95, 563, 9 by MEPs (you can’t make this stuff up),

Recalls that climate change is one of the many challenges facing humanity and that
all states and stakeholders worldwide must do their utmost to measure it
scientifically so that policy, and especially spending, is based on observable facts and not on apocalyptic fearmongering or unreliable models; emphasises that there is
no scientific consensus on what percentage of climate change is anthropogenic and
what percentage is natural

Seems fair enough! Basing decisions affecting 550 million constituents on real hard data is the right thing to do, no? Clearly not. Shut up and follow the religious cult and demand followers cough up twice as much into the collections pot. The lobbyists must be well pleased.

Or,

“Text as a whole without the words: ‘urgently’, ‘and implement’ and ‘to net-zero
emissions by 2050″ defeated 101, 555, 15.

Isn’t it striking that the majority of MEPs won’t even consciously vote in favour of making sure funds are spent appropriately? Nope, bow down and shut up. Otherwise face being cut off as we get to observe from the EuroParl documents below.

This is what an MEP from Northern Ireland, Claire Fox, had to say,

Madam President, I voted against the climate and environmental emergency motion because I’m really concerned at the hyped-up anti-science scaremongering that’s terrifying young people, telling them that billions will die, that there’ll be a collapse of civilisation, a lot of the rhetoric coming out of Extinction Rebellion and echoed in the debate over the last few days. I think that the fact that we voted against an amendment today that said that we should be committed to bringing the environmental subject back to rational discussion, and we rejected it, admits that actually, we’re having an irrational discussion. This becomes advocacy and propaganda, rather than science. There’s no scientific evidence from the IPCC or anyone else about the extinction of humanity, and we should be very careful about claiming that anthropological climate changes cause floods and droughts, which we have been doing quite casually during the last few days. In fact, the IPCC says that such issues are probably caused by socio-economic conditions, and we forget socio-economic conditions too much and demand, in fact, as this Parliament has done, decarbonisation, which will lead to eco-austerity, massive price hikes in energy, and ordinary working people paying the cost for scaremongering and...

(The President cut off the speaker)

or another Northern Irish MEP Robert Rowland,

Madam President, I’d just like to reiterate what my colleague said. I also rejected the COP24 resolution. I may not be an Economics Professor, but I do profess to understand economics. They also call it the dismal science, but when it comes to the climate emergency, I would describe the apocalyptic forecasts as nothing but science fiction. The adoption of these policies today, and the aim of carbon neutrality by 2050 is nothing short of reckless and the most extreme example of economic illiteracy I’ve ever seen. The fact that amendments were rejected demanding a full impact assessment shows rank indifference to the cost and practicality of aggressive climate policies.

One thing I can say for certain is that the impact of net-zero makes the consequence of any form of Brexit look puny by comparison. Dieter Helm, Professor of Energy and Economics at Oxford University, was right when he said: ‘We should be honest that it is a huge industrial undertaking, and it will have significant cost. These are enormous industrial activities, there is nothing in history that looks like this outside of wartime.

In my own country, our own Chancellor has put that cost at over one trillion pounds, or almost 2% of GDP per annum. It is an insane policy.

If the EU truly wishes to make itself even less competitive, in the face of some of the world’s highest electricity prices, they are only self-flagellating in an already flailing economy which continues to slow to 5-year lows. If the EU truly looked at its record since 2007, it would see its policies have delivered 40 million more people into poverty, a number which totals 118 million people, or 23% of the EU population!

If there was ever a bigger load of intellectual dishonesty posted by the EU it would be this. It states that,

Climate emergency declarations in 1,195 jurisdictions and local governments cover 545 million citizens with 53 million of those living in the United Kingdom. This means in Britain now roughly 80 per cent of the population lives in areas that have declared a climate emergency.

The irony if such a statement is that there is no way in the world that 545 million citizens are in agreement within those 1,195 jurisdictions. 53mn Brits? Seriously? In Australia’s case, many declaring climate emergencies have been local green-left councils who have made idle gestures without backing it up with realities. Constituents have not been asked. Windfarm plans for Warringah are not on the agenda.

The greatest irony with the EU is that they classify biomass (which is more polluting than coal) as a renewable and gives it a zero-carbon emission weighting provided a tree is planted per tree burnt. Sadly trees take 40 years to fully grow to be able to offset that produced. However, we will discover that the fine print taketh away the wonderful headlines.

Will the Poles ditch their coal industry to comply or face savage reprisals from Brussels? Will the EU guarantee Poland gets huge subsidies to pay for its termination? Which country would be so blind as to put their livelihoods into the hands of the EU!? The Greeks might have a view as do the Brits.

This action will spectacularly blow up.

By all means ride the short term wave of renewables stocks but be sure to line up all of those nasty fossil fuel companies into the portfolio that get pummeled by financial markets because the type of economic disaster that will beset the EU will only create the conditions where the peons will revolt and force a return to the way things were. Efficient, cheap and reliable forms of energy that will make a proper dent in the poverty line rather than promises and handouts.

The EU needs to learn the lesson that “Charity is injurious unless it helps the recipient to become independent of it.” It won’t be long before the youth of today get to embrace their love for socialism. Experience is a hard teacher. They’ll get the test first and the lesson afterwards.

EU populists thumping establishment

img_2502-1

EU election results so far are a disaster for the eurocrats. This was predictable. As CM has long argued, Brussels has continually ignored the issues of member states. Since 2007, poverty levels have grown from 78mn to 118mn of the EU population. UK won’t be the last to leave the EU, unless the bureaucracy in Brussels makes considerable reforms. CM bets it won’t.

UK: Brexit Party – 31.8% (populist), Tories – 7.6% (incumbent). Tories fallen from 20%. Of interest, Brexit took 38% of the West Midlands which is a slap in the face for Corbyn’s Labour Party. Even Islington, Corbyn’s home constituency, saw Labour fall behind the Lib Dems.

Greece: New Democracy 33.3% (populist), Syriza 23.9% (incumbent/socialist) – snap elections to be held

France: RN – 23.5% (nationalist), LREM 22.5% (incumbent) – Le Pen has called for snap elections.

Germany: CDU – 28.8% (incumbent), AfD – 10.8% (nationalist)

Austria: OVP – 34.9% (incumbent/nationalist), FPO – 17.2% (incumbent/nationalist)

Poland: PiS – 42.4% (incumbent/nationalist)

Italy: Liga -33.6% (populist/incumbent) + M5S – 16.7% (populist/incumbent)

Bulgaria: GERB – 30.1% (incumbent/populist)

Hungary: Fidesz – 52.1% (nationalist/incumbent)

Latvia: JV – 26% (populist/incumbent)

Sweden: Socialist Democrats – 23.6% (incumbent), Sweden Democrats – 15.4% (populist)

Czech: ANO – 21.2% (populist/incumbent)

Romania: PNL – 25.6% (populist), PSD – 21.7% (incumbent)

While results are Still coming in, it seems that the populist swell has only gathered momentum.

Voter turnout to EU elections is generally weak but this is the strongest showing since 1994. This is entirely self-inflicted. Europeans are growing increasingly frustrated at the EU’s authoritarian behaviour. The sooner this project fails the better.

While total seat numbers aren’t fully decided, the percentage terms are undoubtedly going to send shockwaves through the E.U. establishment.

Populist Finns Party set to more than double number of seats

The nationalist, anti-immigrant and eurosceptic Finns Party is set to grow seats from 17 in 2015 to 38 in today’s election, or represent around 17% of parliament. The party election video is an interesting one to say the least.

Whatever one’s personal views on populism, in Europe it is the fastest growing segment in politics. With 118m Europeans below the poverty line, 50% higher than 2007 is it any wonder the citizens of many member states have had enough of EU control. Finland has only 15.7% (up from 12.6% in 2007) poverty as a percentage vs 22.4% (16% in 2007) in the EU-28 but that is enough to trigger the ice cold welfare state to revolt.

Mrs May, do you understand more EU members don’t want to be held captive by Brussels?

Slovenia slaps the EU too

71353699-8885-4004-8247-98936EE02ECB.jpeg

Slovenia has joined the list of populist movements. In 2000, there were 4 countries in the EU that had populist coalitions/majorities (Lithuania, Latvia, Switzerland & Austria). Scroll forward to today we have 15 (the previous 4 countries + Poland, Norway, Czech Rep, Italy, Slovenia, Hungary, Greece, Slovakia, Crete, Bulgaria, Romania). Neighboring Bosnia and Serbia are also populist led. We shouldn’t forget the in the populist/nationalist party surges in The Netherlands, Germany and France . Perhaps more amazing is that the EU still isn’t getting the message, most highlighted by the push to get the President of Italy to put in charge a non-eurosceptic former IMF employee as PM. That’ll work.

So to Slovenia’s election. The Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS) topped Sunday’s election on 25%, handing the anti-immigrant party 25 seats in the parliament. Center-left LMŠ, led by comedian and political satirist Marjan Šarec, came in second on 12.7% (13 seats), and the Social Democrats third on just under 10% (10 seats). SDS leader Janez Janša acknowledged forming a governing coalition will be difficult.

Juncker typified all of the arrogance that has propelled so many anti-establishment parties to power. He said, “Italians have to take care of the poor regions of Italy. That means more work, less corruption, seriousness.” Stereotyping rarely helps. Juncker also made clear that Italy’s problems are not the EU’s fault.

Time and time again, when studying poverty within the EU, the overwhelming number of countries inside the bloc remain worse off than in 2008. Growth rates remain anemic. If you were to look at a map of the floodgates of illegal immigration (which Deutsche Bank published) it isn’t a surprise that the local populations are voting for those governments that will seek to look after the citizens first. So before casting aspersions on a growing number of EU citizens’ assessment of the human rights of asylum seekers, the reality is that the socialists within the EU are clearly utterly dreadful at messaging and even poorer in execution. Then again Baroness Thatcher warned them of that in 1990.

Alternative for Sweden (AfS) is established

F117A48C-B705-44BE-9F26-2886DA9322A5.jpeg

It seems that several members of the conservative anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats (SD) have splintered to form the Alternative for Sweden (AfS) (video here). The party was founded a few weeks ago by Gustav Kasselstrand, a former member of the SD which saw its support slip to 14.8% in November 2017, compared to 18.4% percent in June, according to the Swedish Statistics Office. Although in March 2018, Sentio poll has the SD at 23% (from 21.9%), a Demoskop poll at 18.6% (15.4% in Feb) and SiFo poll at 15.9%.

The government, comprised of the Social Democrats and Greens, had a 36.4% approval rating, compared with 35.6% in the June poll. The AfS thinks that the SD has become too compromising and see the fall in the polls as reason to break away and follow in the footsteps of the rise and rise of Germany’s AfD.

SD party leader Jimmie Åkesson said in Feb 2018 that the party is its own worst enemy…“Our biggest problem is that we have not been able to build real credibility...”
going on to say it was uncertain whether SD would benefit from “…moving further to the right on immigration issues because parties like the Social Democrats and Moderates have snatched our politics within the area [just like Rutte in The Netherlands adopting policies of Geert Wilder’s Freedom Party at the Dutch election last year]…The next term of office will be crucial for us to establish ourselves as a government alternative…We must compromise and be pragmatic

Even at its current level of support, the Sweden Democrats would still have enough seats to block either the centre-left or centre-right blocs from forming government after the upcoming September 2018 election.

The SD saw surging support several years ago on what they saw was politically correct limp-wristed responses to growing migrant crime. In Malmo, Deputy Police Commissioner Mats Karlsson said in response to multiple explosions that occur in the city on a regular basis, “Our dilemma is that we can never guarantee anything for sure. Evidently there are individuals who have hand grenades and they often resort to violence over things that may seem very banal to you or I – a conflict over an ex-girlfriend or a little brother wanting to outperform his big brother…It’s bad enough when they use guns, because they’ve got such poor aim, but grenades are really worrying. They have a 360-degree reach.”

As CM has made the point for years, whether one likes the direction of right wing politics or not, yet more nationalist parties are feeling the seeds of discontent within their own constituencies and offering a platform to parties that don’t seem to be listening. On Sept 9th, Swedes will get their democratic say. Austria, Germany, Holland, Italy, The Netherlands and France have all seen large shifts toward anti-immigrant/eurosceptic parties in recent elections. It isn’t a coincidence with the EU at the helm.

Over 60% of Italians voted for eurosceptic parties

3E0A67ED-BE3B-4579-AE78-A226E4238C5F.jpeg

For a country that has 24 prime ministers in 40 years, Italians are no stranger to volatile politics. However this election, according to the exit polls puts the eurosceptic 5-star (M5S) as high as 32% from initial suggestions it would win 28%. Former Prime Minister Berlusconi’s Forza Italia and Matteo Salvini’s right-wing League (formerly Lega Nord) taking between 32% in the lower house and Senate. Lega’s leader Matteo Salvini has said, “We don’t have a euro in our pockets. We have a German mark which they called the euro.”. The incumbent PD is looking to finish a distant 3rd place With 20-23% of the vote.

Italy requires a 40% lead to form a majority. M5S vows it won’t form a coalition. What is clear is that 60% of Italians voted for parties that are anti EU. While the EU believes it is a club worth its weight in gold, a growing number of its members seem to be rejecting much of what it stands for.