has the EU gone mad?

get this for red tape gone made,

The European Union is voting this week, to try to force outdoor workers to cover up when the sun shines, lol.

Its ludacrous

I saw that earlier today
Yes.
I think they have gone mad.

They should stick to economic issues.

They r even worse at economics, the EU was a bad idea to start with, its politically what hitler wanted.

The vast majority of Europeans dont like how it is going.

Originally posted by la2
They r even worse at economics, the EU was a bad idea to start with, its politically what hitler wanted.

The vast majority of Europeans dont like how it is going.

I think the EU is needed.
The individual countries are too small to have any real say in the world.
The individual economies are just a bit insignificant on their own when compared to the US. When they are added together, like the EU, it puts them on the same scale.

When the US abused their tariff system, the EU placed tariffs against US exports to the EU.
That wouldn't mean much if it were just France or just Spain who did it because that wouldn't have any real affect on the US. When the entire EU did it it made the United States Governement reevaluate it's plans.

The EU clout is very important to Europe's place in the world.
They just need to stop all of the trivial laws within the EU.


[edit on 7-9-2005 by AceOfBase]

the EU is dominated by three countries; Spain, France and Germany, smaller states dont stand a chance in the EU.

IMO the eu was the worst thing that could happen, the only countries that have benefitted from it are the former eastern euro countries ..
Countries such as England, Germany, Spain have allways had resonable economies, the pound and deucthmark were always the strongest currencies to trade in, now look at the euro what a pile of crap, its never gonna be a very strong trading currency until THE WHOLE OF eUROPE use it and hopefully that WILL NEVER happen.

The eu should close up and disband straight away (but they cant coz they are all tied in to some long-term commitment) that we will never see the benifit from?

Excuse me interrupting the EU bashing but, whilst folks are doing their giggling, did it ever occur to anyone that there might actually be a sensible reason behind this proposal?

Namely that the EU is attempting to do something about the frighteningly fast rise in skin cancer rates now going on?

.....and help protect the companies who have a 'duty of care' under health and safety regulations to try and get their workforce to take reasonable steps to avoid exposing themselves to this danger?

You might find this a ridiculous idea; yet another example of an EU with it's 'socialism gone crazy' ideas and all just one great big laugh but you are missing the point.

It isn't the 'socialist' ideas of the EU (or any other European country for that matter) that is 'driving this'.

It is the employers' insurance companies.

They are the ones who are raising premiums to exorbitant levels and insisting that employers limit their exposure to being sued by ensuring they comply with their duty of care to the full and don't have hoards of very ill ex-employees coming looking for compensation when they develop cancers.

Now, carry on kicking at the wrong target if you must........

I would add to sminkeypinkey's comments by saying that it's actually a very American response the EU is taking. Corporate interests are tired of being sued or worrying about being sued by, in this example, skin cancer victims, so legislation is being passed to protect them. Legislation in response to litigation is pretty common stateside.

[edit on 30-11-2005 by koji_K]

Ah ha i knew it wouldnt be long before Sminkey got hold of this thread
hello sminkey.

Insurence is Insurence is Insurence it dont matter what type of policy it is it dont matter what type of company holds that policy, they (the Insurence Company) will have a clause in there somewhere to allow them to get away from paying out in case of a claim.

BUT just when you thought it was safe to go to your local hospital:
i give you this:
Doctors’ poor English ‘risks lives’
Daily Mail 5 July 2005
Patients’ lives are being put at risk because thousands of doctors working in Britain have a poor command of English, experts warned yesterday. Medics from outside Europe are tested on their language skills before being accepted into the profession. But under an EU labour law ruling, doctors from Europe are exempt from the tests.

Well, I'd say that something more indicative in the EU's aims was a law passed that does not allow using a capital letter when using the word "Christ" or a capital "J" when mentioning Jews. And free speech is in danger, too. it's against the law to say anything derogative the EU or their policies. A priest of precher can't even quote the Bible when saying anything about homos.

Since the EU is basically setting up the european countries as :states", like in America, then they should only get one vote at the UN.

sminkeypinkey: I wholeheartedly concur.

Originally posted by spymaster
Ah ha i knew it wouldnt be long before Sminkey got hold of this thread

hello sminkey.

- Alright there, never let it be said I'd let you down!

they (the Insurence Company) will have a clause in there somewhere to allow them to get away from paying out in case of a claim.

- I don't dispute this as a general point but surely you must have noticed the number of stories recently hitting our press about how insurance premiums (especially things like the mandatory liability insurances) are going through the roof?

That's what I mean; employers have to have this and to make their premiums affordable the companies are insisting on this kind of thing.
It's not long once that happens that governments and things like the EU step in with law to take the heat out of the issue and make this a 'level playing field' by law; quite rightly IMO.

Daily Mail 5 July 2005

- Uh oh.

Patients’ lives are being put at risk because thousands of doctors working in Britain have a poor command of English, experts warned yesterday. Medics from outside Europe are tested on their language skills before being accepted into the profession. But under an EU labour law ruling, doctors from Europe are exempt from the tests.

- Do you know that once upon a time this kind of story was all about English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish accents?

The simple fact is that if a doctor is unintelligible to the patients then it is the responsibility of the hospital that hired them. Here in Northern Ireland the complaint is that the staff (from outside of the EU) cannot be understood.
You won't find that in the Mail, huh?

Irrespective of the general guidance hospital and health authorities still interview staff for the possible posts.
if there is a problem it ought to be picked up there.

The UK health service is presently over-reliant on 'foreign staff', that's a sad fact that you can't just ignore, no matter what occasional communications problems may sometimes arise.

It takes us 10yrs to 'train' a doctor to the standard we require so the increased funding begun in 1997 is still some way off of producing its first results.

Still, since when did the Mail ever let the facts get in the way of a chance to bash the EU?

Originally posted by zappafan1
Well, I'd say that something more indicative in the EU's aims was a law passed that does not allow using a capital letter when using the word "Christ" or a capital "J" when mentioning Jews.

- I can honestly say, as a person resident in the EU and reasonably au fait with current affairs here that I have never heard of this "law".

free speech is in danger, too. it's against the law to say anything derogative the EU or their policies.

- No, this is not so. You are mistaken.
We have several parties across the EU that are critical and/or hostile to the EU (especially in the UK).

A priest of precher can't even quote the Bible when saying anything about homos.

- I think you might be confusing this with the much talked about 'incitement to hatred' legislation.
That is something the UK is doing itself, it has nothing to do with the EU.

(although once again there is an angle where employers are helping to drive some of this so as to avoid being sued over employee disputes, where an employee claims constructive dismissal through the hateful actions of co-workers that the employer did little or nothing to stop)

Since the EU is basically setting up the European countries as :states", like in America, then they should only get one vote at the UN.

- Sorry but the EU is doing nothing; the sovereign nation states drive the EU.
Those sovereign nation states remain sovereign nation states and as such are entitled to their UN votes.

You will, however, find occasions where the EU acts collectively (the WTO for instance) and has just the one vote.
This makes sense where 'we' have a single market in place.

We do not have single foreign policies or defence policies so in that regard a single vote would be a nonsense.


[edit on 30-11-2005 by sminkeypinkey]

Originally posted by zappafan1
Well, I'd say that something more indicative in the EU's aims was a law passed that does not allow using a capital letter when using the word "Christ" or a capital "J" when mentioning Jews. And free speech is in danger, too. it's against the law to say anything derogative the EU or their policies. A priest of preacher can't even quote the Bible when saying anything about homos.

Since the EU is basically setting up the european countries as :states", like in America, then they should only get one vote at the UN.

sminkeypinkey: I wholeheartedly concur.

A "rule" or "law" must be considered the same thing if one can be forced to adhere to it:
"It must be getting a little too close for Christmas for the chi-chi crystal palace of the pretentious European Union. Pooh-bahs in Brussels have come up with a new grammar rule for themselves and the Netherlands--making it official that the name "Christ" will soon be written with a lower-case "c". That was the stipulation in an orthography reform published earlier this month in Brussels.

According to the Kath.net agency, the new spelling legislation will also stipulate that the Dutch word for "jews" (joden) be spelled with a capital "J" when referring to nationality and with a lower-case "j" when referring to the religion. The changes will be mandatory in August of 2006. There is no description of the fines offenders will face if they keep right on spelling "Christ" with a capital "C".
Link: www.raidersnewsupdate.com...

As for speaking out against the EU, I heard it a few months ago, and I will try to find it.

Originally posted by zappafan1
According to the Kath.net agency, the new spelling legislation will also stipulate that the Dutch word for "jews" (joden) be spelled with a capital "J" when referring to nationality and with a lower-case "j" when referring to the religion.

- If such a law really does exist (and like I said, hand on heart I can honestly say I have never heard of such a thing.......it sounds just like the mythical anti-EU nonsense that occasionally surfaces) you do realise that you have referred to Dutch law and not an 'EU edict'?

As for the anti-EU thing?
Well self evidently it must be nonsense as we have more than a few dedicated and specifically anti-EU political parties here in the UK and there are others across parts of the EU.

Originally posted by zappafan1
A "rule" or "law" must be considered the same thing if one can be forced to adhere to it:
"It must be getting a little too close for Christmas for the chi-chi crystal palace of the pretentious European Union. Pooh-bahs in Brussels have come up with a new grammar rule for themselves and the Netherlands--making it official that the name "Christ" will soon be written with a lower-case "c". That was the stipulation in an orthography reform published earlier this month in Brussels.

According to the Kath.net agency, the new spelling legislation will also stipulate that the Dutch word for "jews" (joden) be spelled with a capital "J" when referring to nationality and with a lower-case "j" when referring to the religion. The changes will be mandatory in August of 2006. There is no description of the fines offenders will face if they keep right on spelling "Christ" with a capital "C".
Link: www.raidersnewsupdate.com...

As for speaking out against the EU, I heard it a few months ago, and I will try to find it.

What a load of rubbish! You do know Brussels isn't in the Netherlands and if there was such an EU "law", then it would affect more than just Holland.

I think you'll find, if this is anyway slightly true (I get the feeling, as no actual evidence of such a law is forthcoming,that they have misconstrued the facts) that it is along the same vain as the French laws which limit the amount of "english" words used in their language, or stipulate on correct grammar and spelling.

If the Dutch want to spell Christ with a small c, then let them. Who cares? I certainly don't.

Also, capitalizing J for Jews as a nation, but using a lower case for religion isn't unusual, maybe that is what Dutch grammar stipulates?

As for the "law" that prevents you critisizing the EU or whatever, thats a load of rubbish too. What about Veritas? What about Kilroy and his antic in the EU Parliament? Surely he should have been executed for high-treason by now?

As for the thing about Priests and Gays, thats rubbish too. The Catholic Church for example is very vocal on Homosexuality and the Bible.

It seems that you believe that the EU is some overarching entity that is answerable to no-one, similar to US beliefs of the UN being the same.

What you don't realise is that it is the EU member states that pull the strings and we are not dictated too by the EU Commission or Parliament.

Anyway, I get the impression from your saying "homo's" and the general hostility you show towards the EU that your one of those right wing types from the US who knows very little about the world outside of Texas but is more than willing to pass comment (and travelling the world with the US Army does not qualify you as an international expert, before you reply).

May I suggest you research something first before you post, then you may not look so foolish.

You mean it wasn't "mad"? I think so. But who benefits, and why would they need to do that?