And what a circus it was and is......

I refer of course to the events in Parliament yesterday over the banning of wild animals appearing in circuses, a debate initiated by Mark Pritchard, Conservative MP for The Wrekin. The irony of wild MPs acting like animals in the House of Commons, which itself is akin to a circus, seemed to pass MPs by - a tad like turkeys voting for Christmas, but I digress........ (apologies - not)

Richard North, EU Referendum, has commented on this event here and here, pointing out quite correctly that animal welfare is an "occupied field" under EU law. As Richard North states, the so-called principle of the "occupied field" refers to areas in which treaties have handed law and policy-making powers (competence) to the EU. When this happens, Member States lose their powers (competence) in this area, even if the EU has not yet legislated. For those interested, the Hansard report of the debate can be read here, commencing at column 548.

The fact that MPs seem unaware of exactly how much powers of governance now rests with the EU is unforgivable - and rather worrying - especially when considering that at the time of a general election they present themselves to us as capable of governing us. It would indeed be interesting to see whether our MPs would be able to answer the question put to Officials of the Danish Government who, when asked, were unable to mention a single area of Danish law which cannot be affected in some way by the Lisbon Treaty.

Needless to say you will not, nor will you, find any of the foregoing mentioned in the media and even today they are continuing to provide a smoke and mirrors exercise for Cameron, diverting attention to other aspects of EU news. An example of this can be found in this piece by Daniel Knowles, who we are advised is an assistant comment editor writing about politics and economics. Young Daniel begins his masterpiece of journalistic endeavour:

"Faced in Brussels with Greece’s funding crisis, the PM has managed to stop Britain being drawn further into the web of bailouts, and so when Greece does eventually go bust, we will be less exposed than our European partners, France and Germany. Of course we will still be exposed – through the £19bn we contribute to IMF readies and through the £8bn or so our banks are exposed to – but this is still a victory for Mr Cameron. If Britain had been bullied into providing funds for yet another bailout, the PM would have faced a revolt from the Eurosceptic wings of his backbenches. Just yesterday, 14 Tory MPs wrote to the FT (£) to express their concern about Britain’s “throwing good money after bad”. They will now be slightly reassured. But while this helps out Mr Cameron, it is largely insignificant. Britain’s direct exposure to Greece’s catastrophe was never enormous. The most we can lose is a few billion – not pocket change, but well within the margin of error for government spending."

"Britain's direct exposure to Greece's catasgtrophe was never enourmous. The most we can lose is a few billion...." - from what planet is this journalistic sprog, that a few billion is not considered an "enormous" sum of money, especially bearing in mind the parlous state of the nation's finances? Does it not cross his, as yet obviously undeveloped mind, that a few billion would have save our armed forces from such drastic surgery; that the elderly and vulnerable might just have received some of the care they deserve; or even, heaven forbid, fuel and energy prices could be suibsidised together with the odd pothole or two being infilled?

Perhaps our MPs - and Master Knowles - might find this link, containing a potted history of the EU, from The Treaty of Rome to The Lisbon Treaty, of interest and elucidation when they next have occasion to speak or write on the subject.

With the continuing and unending march of the EU, in their ambition for domination of nation states, the time has come - if it has not already been reached - whereby the Houses of Commons and Lords may as well be shut down - thus saving us untold £millions in fiddles salaries and expenses for a totally unnecesary section of our society - and turned into museums in order to glorify what was once a system of government which was the envy of the free world.