Let's see the supposed "democratic" system in action then. EU bans incandescent bulbs

marco_polo

Freeborn John wrote: »

The EU Parliament cannot amend an existing EU law. Monnet did not allow for that because it would provide a means by which voters would be able to reverse previous integration. Instead he gave the EU Commission the monopoly on legislative initiative instead such that nothing previously 'aquired' by the aquis (EU body of law) can be yielded without the agreement of a bodt sworn to 'ever closer union'.

The only mechanism by which competencies can be removed from the union is by exactly the same means that they can be conferred upon it. By unamimous agreement of all member states.

ixtlan

Torakx wrote: »

my point is not about the lightbulbs,i couldnt care less to be honest on that topic.
i presumed the original poster was asking how would we go about changing that law?
and what would our realistic chances be of changing a similar law not necesarily lightbulbs.

I do understand that the no debaters here are only using the lightbulbs as a convenient recent law which will affect the public directly, but I do find it curious that they are not commenting on my comment, which I will make for the fourth time.

Can you come up with a better example for your argument of a powerless Ireland in the face of an opressive EU, considering that we, Ireland, pushed for this law, and considering that it is a law that while it will inconvenience us will surely be accepted as a good thing.

As Scofflaw says, if you are willing to look at the glass half-full scenario, it may be easier for you to affect change in the future.

Also, the no debaters are arguing from a very negative position. Making progress and improving people's lives for the better does not usually come from the ability to block new laws and policies, but rather from the ability to convince others of the right way to proceed. And why bother trying to convince others when we happily make all our decisions nationally? Because almost all those decisions are inextrixably linked with the rest of the EU and indeed the world. Even in this case. Would you like Ireland to withdraw from all climate control treaties? Let everyone else worry about it?

Ix.

Captain Furball

sink wrote: »

Well in the context of the structure and functionality of the EU legally they are our fellow citizens. You may object to this but you cannot deny it's existence.

I'm an Irish citizen not a citizen of every other country.But this thread is about something else, so lets leave it at that.

Scofflaw

Freeborn John wrote: »

The EU Parliament cannot amend an existing EU law. Monnet did not allow for that because it would provide a means by which voters would be able to reverse previous integration. Instead he gave the EU Commission the monopoly on legislative initiative instead such that nothing previously 'aquired' by the aquis (EU body of law) can be yielded without the agreement of a bodt sworn to 'ever closer union'.

Either the Council or the Parliament can request the Commission issue a proposal to repeal existing legislation, or to update it, and regularly do so.

regards,
Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick

Scofflaw wrote: »

You know, the way you've set that question up reflects your own prejudices, and produces exactly the difficulty you've found. You're comparing apples with oranges.

Why would you challenge European legislation only in Ireland? Why are you relying only on Irish MEPs?

You're thinking inside a box here.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Because it would be far easier to organize an Irish campaign than a massive international one, maybe?

sink

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Because it would be far easier to organize an Irish campaign than a massive international one, maybe?

It would be easier to organise a Donegal campaign than an all Ireland one, but what would be the point if the light bulbs will be illegal in the 25 other counties. Do you get my point?

If incandescent light bulbs are illegal in the 26 other states, they will be virtually unavailable here by default. No one is going to bother manufacturing light bulbs specifically for Ireland, and AFAIK North American and Asia bulbs are incompatible with the European electricity grid due to different voltages.

Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Because it would be far easier to organize an Irish campaign than a massive international one, maybe?

That assumes that nobody else in the EU wants the legislation changed, though. Again, you're just thinking "Ireland". How is that different from just thinking "Laois" when it comes to challenging national legislation?

Unless we're talking about a one-man campaign here, it seems reasonable that your ability to contact groups of similar interest over the Internet would allow you to take part in a European campaign just as easily as a national one. And if you all agreed to write to each others MEPs and national legislators, think how much more impact you could have.

Many hands make light work...as they say.

cordially,
Scofflaw

(I admit it - the whole post was a setup for the last line.)

hatrickpatrick

sink wrote: »

It would be easier to organise a Donegal campaign than an all Ireland one, but what would be the point if the light bulbs will be illegal in the 25 other counties. Do you get my point?

If incandescent light bulbs are illegal in the 26 other states, they will be virtually unavailable here by default. No one is going to bother manufacturing light bulbs specifically for Ireland, and AFAIK North American and Asia bulbs are incompatible with the European electricity grid due to different voltages.

Hence why I don't think the EU should be allowed to make europe wide rules like this. It should be up to the electorate of each country to decide. That way the people in each country would have far more influence on the laws, and therefore they would be more democratic.

NOW do you understand my argument that a smaller population = a more democratic government, therefore a national parliament is more democratic than an international body?

Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Hence why I don't think the EU should be allowed to make europe wide rules like this. It should be up to the electorate of each country to decide. That way the people in each country would have far more influence on the laws, and therefore they would be more democratic.

NOW do you understand my argument that a smaller population = a more democratic government, therefore a national parliament is more democratic than an international body?

I understand that argument, but it doesn't follow from what you've said.

cordially,
Scofflaw

oscarBravo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

NOW do you understand my argument that a smaller population = a more democratic government, therefore a national parliament is more democratic than an international body?

A village council in turn is more democratic. Applying reductio ad absurdum, the most perfect expression of democracy is everybody making their own rules to suit themselves, without having to compromise with anybody else.

While this is more democratic, it's patently unworkable. Society can only function when people agree to be bound by a common set of rules.

So we have two different criteria which need to be balanced: the level of democracy, versus the level of efficiency. It's not hard to conclude that, in varying circumstances, a varying mix of democracy versus efficiency is appropriate.

Measuring something solely by its "democraticness" is, at best, pointless.

netron

i am against the banning of these bulbs.


i would like to know some facts regarding this decision:

Who implemented this ban - as in WHO decided on this.

And which MEPS voted on it.

This issue is so symptomatic of the EU in general - nobody has a friggin clue WHERE these laws are coming from, and nobody is accountable.

fulltimeride

Now I for one absolutely loathe the CFL bulbs and I'm quite certain that I'm not alone. Ireland had already banned 100 watt ones but you could still buy 60 and 80 watts. The EU plans to completely phase them out.

As an Irish citizen who is wholeheartedly opposed to this.

Hello, the light bulbs that they are phasing out are inefficent that why there doing it to reduce the impact on climate change.If them banning old light bulbs is the biggest problem on your mind god help you on the lisbon treaty.

netron

fulltimeride wrote: »

Now I for one absolutely loathe the CFL bulbs and I'm quite certain that I'm not alone. Ireland had already banned 100 watt ones but you could still buy 60 and 80 watts. The EU plans to completely phase them out.

As an Irish citizen who is wholeheartedly opposed to this.

Hello, the light bulbs that they are phasing out are inefficent that why there doing it to reduce the impact on climate change.If them banning old light bulbs is the biggest problem on your mind god help you on the lisbon treaty.

in america you would have senators on both sides of the debate and you would know EXACTLY who voted for it.

over here - bugger all.
we havent a clue.

and lightbulbs are "banned".

like some God like finger "banning" them from brussels.

i know the point is minor - tis only lightbulbs and we'll adjust to it, i'm sure we will - but its the decision making process that infuriates me. WHO made the decision and HOW do i overturn that decision?

ei.sdraob

netron wrote: »

in america you would have senators on both sides of the debate and you would know EXACTLY who voted for it.

over here - bugger all.
we havent a clue.

and lightbulbs are "banned".

like some God like finger "banning" them from brussels.

i know the point is minor - tis only lightbulbs and we'll adjust to it, i'm sure we will - but its the decision making process that infuriates me. WHO made the decision and HOW do i overturn that decision?

Several nations including Australia, New Zealand, the US, Canada and the Philippines have also announced plans to phase out traditional bulbs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8230961.stm


wheres your Obama now

Macha

netron wrote: »

i am against the banning of these bulbs.


i would like to know some facts regarding this decision:

Who implemented this ban - as in WHO decided on this.

And which MEPS voted on it.

This issue is so symptomatic of the EU in general - nobody has a friggin clue WHERE these laws are coming from, and nobody is accountable.

Go and read a McKinsey marginal cost curve abatement study, either for Ireland or anywhere else.

I like the way you state you're against the banning of the bulbs and then explicitly profess your ignorance about the issue or the process by which they were agreed on.

sink

FYI - The EU has not banned incandescent bulbs per-se, they have set energy efficiency requirements for all bulbs and traditional incandescent bulbs do not meet the standard, but modern halogen filled incandescent bulbs do.

Modern efficient halogen incandescent bulbs give exactly the same quality of light as traditional incandescents so you won't be force to resort to using compact fluorescents. Anybody with vapid criticisms of these new energy efficiency standards without doing some basic research are only looking for an excuse to get their knickers in a twist.

As always the European Commission has published detailed information on the measures available to all who can be arsed.

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/efficiency/ecodesign/lumen/doc/incandescent-bulbs-en.pdf

netron

taconnol wrote: »

Go and read a McKinsey marginal cost curve abatement study, either for Ireland or anywhere else.

I like the way you state you're against the banning of the bulbs and then explicitly profess your ignorance about the issue or the process by which they were agreed on.

i like the way you have not given an answer to my question.

says a lot.

netron

sink wrote: »

FYI - The EU has not banned incandescent bulbs per-se, they have set energy efficiency requirements for all bulbs and traditional incandescent bulbs do not meet the standard, but modern halogen filled incandescent bulbs do.

Modern efficient halogen incandescent bulbs give exactly the same quality of light as traditional incandescents so you won't be force to resort to using compact fluorescents. Anybody with vapid criticisms of these new energy efficiency standards without doing some basic research are only looking for an excuse to get their knickers in a twist.

As always the European Commission has published detailed information on the measures available to all who can be arsed.

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/efficiency/ecodesign/lumen/doc/incandescent-bulbs-en.pdf

how do we overturn that decision and vote these people out of office?
simple question.

ei.sdraob

netron wrote: »

how do we overturn that decision and vote these people out of office?
simple question.

EU 101 :rolleyes:

European Commission > these are voted in by EU Council and EU Parliament

European Council > these are heads of states of member countries voted in at general elections

European Parliament > voted in directly by people, we last had the exercise 2 months ago


all of these people are elected by you, me and everyone else in EU

and are are voted out by us

imho, the commission are a useless bunch and would have been reduced under Lisbon 1 but no "the people have had their say" so these useless bureaucrats will remain

the parliament are voted by the people directly, the council are voted in by the people (in case of ireland we vote in a party and the choose head guy like Cowen)

ok? comprende?

/

sink

netron wrote: »

i am against the banning of these bulbs.


i would like to know some facts regarding this decision:

Who implemented this ban - as in WHO decided on this.

And which MEPS voted on it.

This issue is so symptomatic of the EU in general - nobody has a friggin clue WHERE these laws are coming from, and nobody is accountable.

Here you go.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&reference=A6-2009-0096&language=EN

Result 46 for 5 against. It also gives a list of the MEP's present but does not say which MEP's voted for and against, but it does give the minutes of the debate so you can read it and find out who supported which side and why.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=CRE&reference=20090423&secondRef=ITEM-020&language=EN&ring=A6-2009-0096

netron

utter joke... if i cant find out which MEPs voted for it, then whats the point?


might as well move to america at this rate.

Stark

People do realise that the Irish Government was already planning on banning incandescent bulbs but decided to wait for the EU to do it instead so they could pass on the blame?

ei.sdraob

netron wrote: »

might as well move to america at this rate.

off ya go

they are being "banned" there too

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61922768&postcount=45

sink

netron wrote: »

utter joke... if i cant find out which MEPs voted for it, then whats the point?


might as well move to america at this rate.

Sorry that was the committee vote not the parliaments vote I linked to before. For the full parliamentary vote see here.

http://www.votewatch.eu/cx_vote_details.php?id_act=6007&lang=en

Every MEP's vote is listed.

Only 4 Irish MEP's were present for the vote and all voted for the legislation.

1 Gay MITCHELL PPE-DE
2 Marian HARKIN ALDE/ADLE
3 Avril DOYLE PPE-DE
4 Colm BURKE PPE-DE