It was actually Sr. Barroso who made the point in a piece for The Times. The aim and point of the European Union is to stop Germany invading France. Again.
OK, valid goal, even though my personal opinion is that they\’ll not try it again. At the third attempt they actually conquered the place and found out it wasn\’t worth the candle, not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian Grenadier.
However, given this stated goal, we\’ve now a metric to use in deciding whether a particular piece of EUery is valid or not.
No, we don\’t measure whether it\’s a good idea or not, we measure the effect it has, could have, might have, on the Wermacht rolling through the Ardennes again.
As I say, \”good idea\” or not is irrelevant, for good ideas can be implemented at other levels: local, regional, national, global even: there\’s no particular reason to have something that is a \”good idea\” rammed down out throats by an unelected bureaucracy: that power is reserved alone for stopping the 14 th Bavarian Foot enjoying the shade of the plane trees as they reach the Midi.
What has an EU directive on whether people with diabetes should be allowed to drive have to do with the single market, asked David Cameron in a pop at Brussels in his speech to the Tory party conference on Wednesday. Apart, presumably, from roads being a key factor in distributing goods, and the fitness of people to drive being a key factor in ensuring everyone else\’s safety.
\”Do you suppose anyone in China is thinking, \’I know how we\’ll grow our economy – let\’s get those diabetics off our roads\’?\” the prime minister asked the conference.
Diabetes UK, the main charity helping people with the condition, has expressed concerns over some elements of the new driving standards package being implemented through a new directive.
However, it does not think the changes are all bad. Indeed, some could actually improve the chances of employment for some insulin-dependent drivers. Some have lost their HGV licences under the present UK blanket ban on them driving heavy lorries – a rule that is more stringent than in many European countries.
Sorry Ms. Curtis, you\’re addressing the wrong question. It isn\’t, as you seem to think, a matter of whether it\’s a good idea that diabetics can or cannot drive and under what conditions they may or may not do so. It\’s why does this particular level of our governance, the one tasked with stopping the panzers rolling, get to make these rules?
Even the defenders of the system agree that there\’s a democratic deficit: one that can\’t be helped, as we\’re all trying to stop a war here. Which means that, where a rule, a law, can possibly be implemented elsewhere then it should, we abuse the normal methods of governance only to, precisely and exactly, prevent that war.
Unless this law is about whether diabetics can drive Tiger Tanks through Amiens it is not relevant to the EU\’s goal and therefore should not be instituted at EU level.