It is always a delight to look at the "Europe" section of the Heritage foundation. Here a Heritage Staffer advises Great Britain to reject the Lisbon Treaty. He sites several reason for that, for example that a European Public Prosecutor would be created which, I guess, would than destroy British sovereignty, or whatever.
That is all nice and unremarkable. But what I found fantastic is the source of information for these accusation: non other than Daniel Hannan.
Instead of really looking at the relevant document himself the staffer simply quotes some blog.
Wow. And for that you can get money at Heritage. A great Job!
Now look, for any pro-EU Think Tank employee:
The Lisbon treaty will have many benefits for the 27 nations of the European Union. Streamlining the decision process will create a better business environment that will increase growth in the Union by 10% over the next 10 years and will create up to 10 mio. jobs, or even more.
You can quote me with that!
Wednesday, 7 November 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
10 million, surely 30 million?
And that is just in the service industries. Then maybe another 25 million to be employed by the various governments in order to ensure that their rights are protected.
Then if we bring in Turkey, overnight the number of people employed would have a massive hike.
You sell Europe short
As I say 10 mio. (or more!).
Note: I am not sure if I really have to mention this but ... I am not serious!
It's good work if you can get.
RZ, if I remember correctly, the CER wrote a paper on why the treaty is good for business and for Britain (last Summer?).
The Commission tries to cut red tape for business. Edmund Stoiber has been called in to speed up the process.
The Commission has developed impact assessments for new legislation and plans to scrap a number of existing proposals (see legislative and work programme 2008).
In addition, even if EC regulation had been too heavy-handed, would British and other business be happier with 27 sets of red tape than, at least partly, a single set for the internal market?
Finally, can there be advances towards a working internal market and fair competition as well as enlargement without a European Union which functions tolerably well?
(The Lisbon Treaty being but one, modest step in that direction.)
Grahnlaw,
essentially I agree with what you are saying. It is clear that one has to look at each regulation individually and than see if it is to heavy handed.
At some point I want to write a post about this Idea which is often put forth by Eurosceptics that there should be a Free Trade Zone without the political Union. Exactly as you write it, it is difficult to imagine a real European Free Trade Zone, when there are 27 sets of different regulations.
Post a Comment