Reply to: UKIP will walk it?

[darmstadt]

Because none of them have been diagnosed with an illness caused by air pollution. If air pollution was such a big problem then why is so little being done about it?

If no one read about it in the newspaper no one would bother worrying about it

Then newspapers should stop writing about anything important then, oh....Daily Mail!

FYI, but don't let facts sway you:

Air Quality England - local authority air quality data from Ricardo-AEA

https://www.gov.uk/check-local-environmental-data

BBC News - Air pollution: High levels to spread across England

[darmstadt]

Neither I or anyone I know suffers ill effects of air pollution. Furthermore slowing down cars means they spend more time on the roads emitting pollution. Why not go the whole hog and reduce limits to 1 mph? why not 59.9 mph if that is too slow?. Who makes these figures up? And why are there speed limits on roads at 3.00 am in the morning when there is no traffic.

Like sheep you fawn over anything that seems to be solving a problem that actually does not even exist in the first place. If there is no problem the EU will make one up. Just like making cornish people into an ethnic group all these things do is give these that administer the policies power and money.

Presumably neither you nor anyone you know has suffered the effects of injecting heroin into their eyeballs either? Moron, and not just for your first sentence. Nowhere do I advocate the 60mph speed limit, all I have said is that it is how the UK government decide to implement CO2 reductions.

I think you'll find that many people suffer from the effects of air pollution: UK-AIR, air quality information resource - Defra, UK And now I suggest just to prove us all wrong you can try sucking on a car exhaust...

[alluvial]

Have you ever considered that your cognitive impairment might be exacerbated by long-term exposure to air pollution?

Do you by any chance live within 100yds of the M25?

[speling bee]

"In general the long-term trend shows air quality is getting better, but there is still a lot to do to achieve even cleaner air, requiring local, national, and international action."

In other words keep paying us money to make sure the problem continues to exist in the minds of the fools that keep paying us.

Have you ever considered that your cognitive impairment might be exacerbated by long-term exposure to air pollution?

[vetran]

These have been out for a while, maybe retrofitting these as an alternative to taxing older vehicles at stupid rates would be a wise idea?

Retrofits | Technology | National Clean Diesel Campaign | US EPA

http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/en...aar03_2012.jpg

[DodgyAgent]

How do you know?

BBC NEWS | Health | Air pollution causes early deaths

"In general the long-term trend shows air quality is getting better, but there is still a lot to do to achieve even cleaner air, requiring local, national, and international action."

In other words keep paying us money to make sure the problem continues to exist in the minds of the fools that keep paying us.

[speling bee]

Because none of them have been diagnosed with an illness caused by air pollution. If air pollution was such a big problem then why is so little being done about it?

If no one read about it in the newspaper no one would bother worrying about it

So do you think ill health effects only occur in conjunction with diagnosis of disease?

[DodgyAgent]

How do you know?

BBC NEWS | Health | Air pollution causes early deaths

Because none of them have been diagnosed with an illness caused by air pollution. If air pollution was such a big problem then why is so little being done about it?

If no one read about it in the newspaper no one would bother worrying about it

[speling bee]

Neither I or anyone I know suffers ill effects of air pollution.

How do you know?

BBC NEWS | Health | Air pollution causes early deaths

[DodgyAgent]

Where do I say they were good? Although why isn't it practical to have 60mph speed limits on the M6 and other roads to cut air pollution although it maybe more practical to provide a much better public transport infrastructure to remove the high amount of cars on the road (77 vehicles per km of road, France is only 36 and Germany is 75) Remember, this is the UK government's way of reducing emissions. Maybe there are better ways or do you think that emissions are okay?

Neither I or anyone I know suffers ill effects of air pollution. Furthermore slowing down cars means they spend more time on the roads emitting pollution. Why not go the whole hog and reduce limits to 1 mph? why not 59.9 mph if that is too slow?. Who makes these figures up? And why are there speed limits on roads at 3.00 am in the morning when there is no traffic.

Like sheep you fawn over anything that seems to be solving a problem that actually does not even exist in the first place. If there is no problem the EU will make one up. Just like making cornish people into an ethnic group all these things do is give these that administer the policies power and money.

[darmstadt]

"60mph on M6 - part of the Highways Agency Controlled Motorways scheme (Smart Motorways) which is in part due to moves to meet European Union rules on fighting dangerous levels of air pollution. Don't see that in other countries, its just how the UK government decide to implement these laws which were passed by MEPs who were democratically elected

Works councils - have been around since the 20's in other countries. The EWC Directive (94/45/EC) applies to all companies with 1,000 or more workers, and at least 150 employees in each of two or more EU Member States. So if you don't have at least 150 employees in other countries, then it doesn't affect you (in Britain they're called Joint Consultative Committee) and is still only formed when more than 100 employees of the company want one"

Explain what is so good about these policies. You seem to be taken in by the "high minded" weasel words of ambition rather than the practicalities

Where do I say they were good? Although why isn't it practical to have 60mph speed limits on the M6 and other roads to cut air pollution although it maybe more practical to provide a much better public transport infrastructure to remove the high amount of cars on the road (77 vehicles per km of road, France is only 36 and Germany is 75) Remember, this is the UK government's way of reducing emissions. Maybe there are better ways or do you think that emissions are okay?

[DodgyAgent]

"60mph on M6 - part of the Highways Agency Controlled Motorways scheme (Smart Motorways) which is in part due to moves to meet European Union rules on fighting dangerous levels of air pollution. Don't see that in other countries, its just how the UK government decide to implement these laws which were passed by MEPs who were democratically elected

Works councils - have been around since the 20's in other countries. The EWC Directive (94/45/EC) applies to all companies with 1,000 or more workers, and at least 150 employees in each of two or more EU Member States. So if you don't have at least 150 employees in other countries, then it doesn't affect you (in Britain they're called Joint Consultative Committee) and is still only formed when more than 100 employees of the company want one"

Explain what is so good about these policies. You seem to be taken in by the "high minded" weasel words of ambition rather than the practicalities

[darmstadt]

Keep going ...

Why? Can't you do it for yourself?

[d000hg]

No , but if UKIP becomes a majority in Parlement then the whole world would stop trading. There is no way that a predominant socialist europe , Latin America and Africa would continue business as usual with a right wing, racist government.

I think that's a bit naive. You have to do a bit more to damage trade than be right wing and hold controversial views. Really, unless you're killing your own citizens you're not going to get much reaction and even then you get told "that's not really on old bean" to begin with!

[Mich the Tester]

Eh? In most national parliaments, when a government publishes a bill, it is quite often clear what will come out of the procedure and it is headline news if the parliament amends it against the will of the government (or the unelected civil servant who wrote it.) Many people claim that certain national parliaments are little more than rubber-stamps for their government's legislation. In the European Parliament this is definitely not so. A draft Directive, not unlike a bill, really is a draft. MEPs have to go through it paragraph by paragraph, amending it and rewriting it. So do the ministers in the Council and ultimately the positions of the two must be reconciled in what (*) amounts to a bi-cameral legislature at EU level. But the net effect is that every year, thousands of amendments to draft legislation put forward by ordinary back-bench MEPs end up on the statute books and apply across the EU.


For simple folk:



(* see the Amsterdam treaty)

http://forums.contractoruk.com/gener...ml#post1931761