Forgot to turn off your coffee machine?

[Bazj]

No need to worry..... those meddlers in the EU parliament will do it for you from today!!

 

On the back of reducing the suction power of vacuum cleaners and regulating how long your coffee machine can stay on, they have now decided that they will also control when your internet linked TV's, computers and routers will switch off..... apparently all in the name of energy savings.... or is it the fact that we are all too stupid in their eyes to be allowed any modicum of control over our own lives... It will save us money they tell us.....

 

all this from a corrupt organisation that costs us over £100 million a year just so they can move buildings every month 

 

Some may think that UKIP is not the answer..... but surely the EU is certainly not!!

[Evil Sid]

so how much energy would be saved if all the illuminated advertising spaces in the cities were turned off instead of illuminating the areas at night with their wares.

 

I am on about those huge great building sized ones that resemble watching hundred foot tv's. Must use a lot of juice to keep them going through the night.

 

As for my coffee machine if they can turn mrs sid off for a short while i would be grateful. (quick glance over shoulder to make sure she not reading this then sighs with relief)

[inky pete]

They'd save even more energy if they turned off all the lights at the EU................then locked the door and threw away the key!

 

Imagine what the carbon footprint of the whole Brussels to Strasbourg merry-go-round, and MEP's plus staff travelling back and forth to home country's must be.

[Bazj]

But the EU is not a democratic organisation Inky; we do not have a say in any of the madness they get up to.... it is a dictatorship; a real do as we say not do as we do set up..... 

[P J]

Neither reducing the suction power of vacuum cleaners nor forcing your coffee machine to turn off are strictly true though are they, just more Eurofurore from the usual sources.  Like straight banana bans and other classic euro myths a little fact is taken and twisted into a "bonkers Brussells Bureaucrat " headline.  Vacuum cleaners must be energy efficient not less powerful and coffee makers from a certain date must have an OPTION to auto shut down.  All quite sensible really.  

[Bazj]

but you can't get a vacuum cleaner that is as powerful but with a less meaty engine.... look what they have had to do to the Henry Hoovers... I have a new one and an old one... the new one is nowhere near as good.

 

It is meddling pure and simple

[P J]

It isn't true Baz, some of the top 10 vacuum cleaners according to Which conform to the new specifications.  Look at F1 cars and how they dramatically reduced the engine size and introduced many energy saving features and they are still lapping around the same times.  I remember people on here saying that EU meddling had doomed the small MOT garages , and that British number plates were being banned and that bagpipes were being banned and that the EU inspectors were going to dig up your gardens and that farmers were being forced by the EU to give toys to pigs and that prawn cocktail flavour crisps were being banned and that double decker buses would be banned and that EU meddling was making it illegal to sell Bombay mix and that barmaids breasts would have to be fully covered at all times and that fireman's poles were being banned and that we would have to call the great British banger an emulsified high-fat offal tube.   There are hundreds of de bunked myths regarding EU regulations all peddled by unscrupulous right wing media with more of an  interest in scaremongering than in fact.

[observer]

So there's no EU specification for jam then? !

[P J]

There are many food specifications which make what we eat safer, or make it clearer for us to know what we are eating, usually disbarring the use of certain harmful additives etc..  As with the appliances energy efficiency guidelines our Government wanted it too.  Perhaps if some of our MEPs were in the meetings fighting for what they believed was best for Britain rather than going down the pub spending their ill gotten expenses things may be different.  Is there an EU directive saying that cows have to wear nappies?  No there isn't but that didn't stop the usual suspects reporting it.

 

Sometimes people are so desperate to believe something their common sense goes out the window.  A while back there was a poster on here who actually believed that Muslims were trying to get Peppa Pig banned, imagine that !

[Bazj]

It isn't true Baz, some of the top 10 vacuum cleaners according to Which conform to the new specifications.  

 

The new rules came into force with vacuum cleaners in September last year... many of the cleaners in the "Best Buy" tables for which have motors which exceed the new limits....

 

since January 2013, seven vacuum cleaners have been awarded their "Best Buy" status... out of this 7,  5 have motor sizes that exceed 1600w, with the average currently being 1800w across the board.

 

However the EU meddlers want to reduce that to 900w by 2017.... so you will either have to spend twice as long trying to vacuum your dust up (which sort of negates the whole supposed energy savings) or go back to a dustpan and brush....

 

With regards to the MOT; it was not scaremongering at all.... the original directive stated that MOT tests could not be carried out in the same garage that carries out motor repairs, which would have affected tens of thousands of small garages. They eventually changed that part after complaints it would drive garages out of business.... but there is still a plan to abolish MOT tests for Historic and classic cars (IMHO the very type of cars which should have a test) 

[Bazj]

So maybe many of the so-called myths aren't debunked, they could well be on initial draft proposals for legislation but are amended after people point out how stupid they are in the first place!

[observer]

This one isn't about sterilising jam jars, which would be common sense food safety; it's about what constitutes "jam", in order to market it.

[P J]

No Baz, they are simply misinterpreted, usually deliberately by the right wing press, usually the Mail or Express.  If some of the best buy Vacuums already conform you have to agree that it is doable.

 

 

Here are a few facts to digest

 

Watering down MOTs

Britain may have to ease MoT’s on cars in order to comply with a Directive from Brussels that aims to harmonise procedures throughout the EU. This would result in tests not starting until cars are four years old, unlike the three year limit in the UK, thereafter they would need be tested only at two year intervals, as opposed to the UK’s compulsory annual test.

(Daily Mail, p20, 5 April 1994)

This is wholly untrue. The European Commission has no intention of proposing anything of the sort.
There is a Directive (*) in force that sets out minimum standards for MoT tests. Most national standards, including all existing UK ones, are perfectly in line with this and therefore needn’t be changed in the least to satisfy European law.(*) – Directive 88/849, amended by Directive 91/225

 

Vintage cars to be forcibly removed from the roads

 

A law that was originally designed to deal with abandoned motors could lead to lovingly part-restored MGs and what-have-you being removed forcibly from driveways as junk….

(The Express, page 23, 12 June 1999)

For environmental reasons, the End of Life Vehicle legislation will make provision for the recycling of car parts and unwanted cars. Vehicles will, of course, only be scrapped if owners explicitly wanted that.

 

Vacuum cleaners

 

Over the past week there have been various reports about how EU energy saving regulations might affect future vacuum cleaners. We would like to put a few issues straight.

Less power does not mean less performance. The aim is to give consumers a better deal all round with vacuum cleaners that suck up more dirt, use less electricity, help keep energy bills down and are better for the environment. Inefficiently designed models will be phased out.

The new EU regulation focuses on dust pick-up efficiency as well as power. A vacuum cleaner that picks up more dust per passage over the floor only needs to be used for shorter periods and thus uses less energy.

Studies have shown that the introduction of these efficient vacuum cleaners would save 19 terawatt hours (TWh) of energy annually in the EU by 2020. As a comparison, this annual saving alone would keep the London Underground running for up to twenty years.

From September 2014 the maximum allowed input power will be 1600 Watt; from September 2017 it is 900 W. (current average on the market is about 1800 W)

Rather than focus on the energy savings and consumer benefits, the Daily Express said the regulation would create a potential health risk “because lower powered vacuum cleaners will not pick up allergy-provoking dust”. This is simply not the case. The regulation seeks to reduce dust emissions and clearly sets minimum requirements for the ability of a vacuum cleaner to pick up dust.

This will all be reflected in a new labelling system, so consumers can be clearly informed as to what they are buying.

The label will also outline the following important information:

Energy efficiency (A-G rating similar to those on washing machines and fridges)
Performance (ability to pick up dust)
Dust re-emission in the exhaust air (particularly important for dust related allergies)
Noise levels

So the regulation is not so much about banning high powered vacuum cleaners as encouraging high performance, energy efficient, dust busting technology.

The regulation on eco-design requirements is an update to take into account technological advances and derived from existing EU law agreed in 2009 by the European Parliament and by Member States.

This update is not simply based on a decision handed down by the European C0mmission – Member States can block the Commission’s proposal either through a vote of their experts or later at political level.

The procedure is as follows. Such changes to the eco-design rules require first a qualified majority (in other words a large majority of votes weighted by size of Member State) of experts in a committee of Member States. Either the European Parliament or the Member States in the Council then have several months to vote to block the procedure. That period has now elapsed, so the Commission will now formally adopt the new rules. Producers will have ample time to adapt to the new rules – see above.

 

There are dozens more Baz and the biggest majority of what you read about these Brussells Diktats are bunkum to be honest.  I will continue to post some of the more ridiculous and stupid ones over time.  Of course the EU will obviously make mistakes along the way too, which can mostly be ignored or not taken on such as buying eggs by the dozen.

 

 

 

 

 

[P J]

This one isn't about sterilising jam jars, which would be common sense food safety; it's about what constitutes "jam", in order to market it.

In a jam? I never mentioned the sterilisation of jars, Presume you mean this ?

 

If you believed some press this week, Brussels bureaucrats have been busy destroying the great British breakfast by cutting the minimum sugar content in jam from 60% to 50%….. “EU threatens future of British jam”, “British jam is toast – EU sugar rule row”, “EU rules will ruin jam with our cream tea”.

Yet according to some newspapers at the end of March…. EU red tape had allegedly been strangling plucky British jam producers by… NOT allowing them to cut the sugar content in jam from 60% to 50%.

So were they right seven months ago, or are they right now?

Well, neither.

In fact EU law – not handed down from Brussels but agreed by the UK government with other Member States – always gave the UK flexibility to cut the minimum sugar content in jam to 50%.

Seven months ago, the government had not yet chosen to use that flexibility. Now, after small producers made a strong case, it has chosen to use it.

We published this earlier blog on 25 March after extensive media coverage blaming EU rules for the plight of British jam producer Clippy McKenna who couldn’t sell her produce as jam because it didn’t meet the 60% sugar content minimum.

We explained that the same EU rules allowed Member States exemptions to apply a lower sugar content threshold and that some countries had taken advantage of this long ago.

The UK authorities were about to launch a consultation on amending the national rules here, too.

This consultation has now taken place and the debate this week in the House of Commons which sparked the latest interest in jam making concerned the amendment to the rules put forward by Defra.

The MP who was referred to as blaming the EU for the situation has made clear that she was not doing so. The transcript of her remarks confirms that. Defra has also been perfectly clear about the situation.

So the whole gloopy jam of confusion was home made by the media.

It was not “new regulations from Brussels”, or “the UK falling into line with an EU directive which says jam must be at least 50 per cent sugar”, as some reported.

It is one thing for the EU to be accused of “ridiculous EU jam laws” but to be in the dock a few months later for “threatening the future of British jam” – because the UK government has decided to change the very same “jam laws” the media had previously so strongly objected to – is pretty good going.

Needless to say, on both occasions, facts were spread thin.

It is encouraging that the Sun, the Express and the Mirror have agreed to correct their stories – but that comes too late to prevent a lot of people getting the wrong end of the stick.

Jam is not at the top of the political agenda.

But the rush to condemn the EU for taking a position and then for not taking that very same position – over a situation which the UK government could change anyway – is perhaps indicative of just how skewed much UK media coverage of anything pertaining to the EU has become.

[Bazj]

Having seen some of the cars and trucks from some EU countries on the roads I would very much doubt that they have been anywhere near any form of MOT test for years, let alone annually!

 

Anyway... I know you like the Telegraph; check this out: (From November last year....)

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/11248616/Quiz-crazy-EU-law-or-made-up-law.html

[P J]

Ive seen it already Baz,  so if the EU makes so many crazy rulings why does the press need to manufacture so many more?  I don't try to pretend its all good, but some on here try to portray it as purely bad.  Not the case but hey, it said it in the Mail........................

[P J]

Anyway back to the original post, the automatic switch off on new coffee machines is OPTIONAL, a bit like a screen saver on your pc.  I suppose screen savers are a meddling attack on our civil liberties too lol

[Davy51]

Is the policy of turning motorway ,trunk road & street lighting off from midnight to 5am a Euro directive or has that come from local councils & the UK government ?

[P J]

Is the policy of turning motorway ,trunk road & street lighting off from midnight to 5am a Euro directive or has that come from local councils & the UK government ?

I don't know, could you tell me if Brussels made it illegal for British pubs to sell pints of shandy?

[Davy51]

Never heard of that one ,but i will be going out to do some research very shortly.

[P J]

       don't ask for pale ale as they are supposed to have banned that too

[Evil Sid]

could you tell me if Brussels made it illegal for British pubs to sell pints of shandy?

If they have then every pub I drink in is breaking the law as these days all I drink is two or maybe three pints of shandy depending how thirsty I am. ( a right little raver on the side I am)

[P J]

I know it sounds ridiculous Sid but that is what some of the media were printing.  A bit of fun to prove the point.

 

A man walks  into a bar and asks the barmaid, * Could I have a pint of shandy, 2 light ales, a packet of prawn cocktail crisps, half a dozen plckled eggs and have you any darts for the board?   Oh and might I say that your low cut top is very nice Love"

 

 

 At this point the loud mouthed , casual racist in the tweed suit propping up the bar dropped down dead of a heart attack

[observer]

If folk didn't read newspapers and relied on the BBC, perhaps we'd only get to know about the factual anomalies of the EU?

[P J]

If folk didn't read newspapers and relied on the BBC, perhaps we'd only get to know about the factual anomalies of the EU?

hahahaha  is that it?   Why all the lies Observer, why the need to tell people in glaring headlines that the great British public will no longer be allowed, under EU rules, to call a yoghurt a yoghurt and instead should refer to it as a"mild, alternate-culture, heat-treated fermented milk"  Utter hogwash like most of the sensationalist propaganda bandied about by the more fascist publications.  Many things will be discussed, proposed, passed, dropped etc. as the EU, unless you forgot, is a rather large body.  You may not like the fact that Britain is in it and thats your right but we are in it and whilst we are I think our democratically elected MEPs should be in there fighting our corner not just taking taxpayers hard earned money to pxxs up the wall of the nearest Brussels bar.  If the EU is so bad, why the need for all these lies?