EU expects to raise €140bn from windfall tax on energy firms

 Fossil fuel extractors will be asked by the EU to give back 33% of taxable surplus profits for the 2022 fiscal year, in a move that could pile pressure on Liz Truss to reverse her decision not to extend the UK’s windfall tax on oil and gas companies, which is set at 25%. Truss has ruled out extending the £5bn windfall tax on energy companies introduced by the former chancellor Rishi Sunak.

In a further sign of the UK’s post-Brexit divergence, the new prime minister has also stopped short of asking consumers and businesses to reduce their energy use over the winter.

In contrast, the commission wants EU member states to sign up to a legally binding target to cut electricity use by 10% overall and by 5% during peak hours, via efficiency campaigns and incentives.

The plan mirrors an already agreed voluntary target of cutting gas consumption by 15% until the end of spring 2023. “Demand reduction helps rebalance the energy market, lower energy bills, reduce emissions and makes us immune to Russia’s gas games. Without demand reduction, it is not going to work,” Timmermans said.

The DUP and Loyalists have made their bed; let them lie in it.

The DUP and Loyalists/Unionists got what they wanted but cannot accept the consequences and want back all the advantages of being in the EU without actually being in!

For decades, and even more so since the 'Yes' for Brexit, the EU has been incredibly patient, long-suffering, forbearing, good-natured, diplomatic and polite with us awkward, trouble-makers that is the UK. The EU has leant over backwards to be understanding and helpful. Even to the extent of agreeing to a no land border. Even then the UK is not satisfied. The DUP wanted out of EU, they got what they wanted when NI voted to stay in and still they are not satisfied! The EU should not make any more concessions to these embarrassing Conservatives and Unionists. They are the unreasonable ones who now need to knuckle down and accept their folly. Or, would they prefer a land border?

"Lost an empire and not yet found a role"

LOST AN EMPIRE AND FOUND WE COULD CARRY ON REGARDLESS - ROLE OR NO ROLE, EMPIRE OR NO EMPIRE!

Our military and non-violent involvements in the world, particularly our wars during and after empire all point to us behaving in an imperialistic way regardless of our ownership of other countries.

Other European countries in giving up their colonies and, therefore, diminishing in the eyes of the world, have not acquired WMD or continued fighting distant wars like the UK has.  They have accepted their non-colonial, new role and behaved like the other countries, numbering very nearly 190, who have not got WMD or expenditure on armaments at such a high proportion of their income as we have.

Why does the UK have so much trouble in accepting that it is far better to live without an empire and, without warfare and, without threatening other countries with WMD?

Losing an empire, after fighting the one world war in two parts, has made very little difference, it seems to me.  Nor has our membership of the EU made any difference.  We just carried on regardless, anyway!

Aristotle on Brexit!

Author: Sotirios Frantzanas

"To make this clearer, joining the EU made it obligatory for the UK to accept and enact on EU laws and regulations. This means that the UK parliament’s supremacy over making laws has been arguably reduced, even though the UK participated actively in the EU’s decision-making processes. This is also despite that it enjoyed possibly the most privileged membership that enabled it to be selective, and opting out from EU legislation on various occasions; the European Monetary Union, the Schengen Agreement and so on.6 

"It seems that the fact that the UK, much like Denmark, Poland and Ireland, had the opportunity to negotiate and opt-out from EU legislations is evidence that sovereignty, at least in terms of the power to negotiate, remains with the member-state; it is not exchanged for membership. That could be the case, if the UK parliament had lost its authority to withdraw the UK from the EU.7 That would be the case in which it could be said that the supremacy of the UK government has been lost.

"However, Brexit is the best example that the UK has remained a sovereign country throughout and there is no reason to believe that this would not be the case for an independent Scotland joining the EU as an equal member. In other words, the necessary sharing of sovereignty, in terms of having to accept EU legislation, is inevitable in the same way it is inevitable for everyone that decides to be a member of a democratic society to follow its laws and norms as well as to participate actively in their making. This is actually something that arguably enhances rather than reduces sovereignty.

"Being part of a community of nations requires putting the whole above the individual parts and thus voluntarily sharing individual sovereignty, to gain access to a larger pool of opportunities for development alongside other member-states. As Aristotle said, thousands of years ago: ‘those that live in isolation and not in political communities are either beasts or gods.’8 Similarly, any country in the modern political world that chooses isolation over participation in the global political community is either not rational or is suffering from delusions of grandeur. Without saying that the EU, or any other political community for that matter, is perfect, Scotland should be wise and choose participation over isolation."

THE BACKSTOP!

The BBC Radio 4 definition on 12.3.19: "The Backstop is the mechanism designed to fulfil the pledge made by the UK and the EU that the Irish border will remain open after Britain leaves.  It will kick in if a trade agreement with Brussels was not reached at the end of the post Brexit transition period.  It is contentious because it involves, in part, Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK temporarily remaining in a customs union with the EU."

Journalists, like Jeremy Vine, have described it as ensuring a "no wall between the ROI and NI.  ... there must be no physical border.  It leaves NI closer to the EU and the ROI than the UK."

The White Poppy and the Red

The white poppy was introduced in 1933 by the Co-op Women's Guild to remember those affected by war on all sides, all casualties and the refugees.  It also works for conflict resolution, diplomacy, and positive, practical peacemaking to be used so that war might become the last resort when all else has failed.  The white poppy works for talking with the adversary well before any killing starts.

The red poppy, introduced in 1921, remembers UK armed forces casualties and, through the British Legion, helps their families in many practical ways.  The red poppy does NOT indicate bloodshed.  It does not want, 'Lest we forget', to mean 'Lest we ever forget to wage war'.

2,000 years ago Jesus Christ rejected empire building when he was tempted by the devil to bow down to him and he would be given all the kingdoms of this world.  800 years ago our own country started empire building and collected its nearest country, Ireland first.  It then continued off and on until the First World War that saw the collapse of the German empire, the Austria-Hungary empire, the Russian empire and the beginnings of the end for the British and French empires.

Empire building is called colonialism or imperialism.  It was one reason for the start of the 1914 World War, together with militarism and nationalism according to Professor Niall Ferguson.

Nationalism was seen because it was a Serbian nationalist who assassinated the heir to the Austrian-Hungarian throne.  That led, four weeks later, to the 1914 World War.  Militarism was seen with the naval arms race between Britain and Germany up to 1914.

Britain was fighting the wronged party, Austria-Hungary, that had their heir to the throne killed.  In other words, we were on the wrong side and Germany was on the side of the victim, Austria-Hungary.  Hindsight now shows us that all out, total war between the European empires as punishment over two royal assassinations was way over the top.  It led to many millions killed and injured and, unfinished business that ended with the second half of the World War that caused more horrors and killings for nearly six years to 1945.

The first war had western European world empires fighting each other.  No empires, no imperialism, no colonialism would have meant a shorter, quicker war.  It would never have led to the second world war in 1939.

The stupidity of Britain so quickly and eagerly entering the war on the 4 August 1914, seems to have led to us waging war in many different countries in every single year up to the present day.  Astonishing but true!  It seems we have a penchant for killing foreigners in their own countries for over 100 years.

The only upside was that finally, after many centuries, the European nations were brought to their senses and ended warfare between themselves by working for a federal Europe with the Treaty of Rome and, eventually, the EU.

Useless Idiots

Dear Editor  - exclusive to the Times; NOT for publication in the Express and Star or the Birmingham Post.

Useless Idiots

You wrote, “Nato was created in 1949 as an alliance of free nations to deter Soviet expansionism and aggression.” THE TIMES 15 September.

The ‘Guardian’ in February 2014​,​ proved in their four page spread that it was not the USSR but the UK that has had their armed forces in action in other countries in every single year since at least 1914.  It was hoped that 2015 would be the first year since at least 1914 that the UK was not killing foreigners in their own lands.

It seems that the Cold War was stoked and Nato formed by the West out of paranoia that it was about to be attacked and overrun by the Soviet Union.  This, mind you, after the Russians had just sacrificed about 25 million of their people to help us win a war they had no part in starting! Nato was formed in 1949 and continues.  Their equivalent, the Warsaw Pact lasted from 1955 to 1991. In other words, ​formed ​in response to the West’s unfriendly alliance that they felt threatened them.​ They dissolved their military alliance in 1991.  Since ​then​, the West has continued to spread its influence eastwards to diminish Russian influence and to expand the West’s EU and Nato membership.

Fear of attack by Russia was also used to justify a huge arsenal of weapons of every description.  Nato helped to give respectability to the three leading members for their many wars of expansionism, aggression and regime change around the world.  So much for setting a fine example to other countries! If you make yourself an enemy, you must expect to be treated as an enemy.

The West has unilaterally strengthened itself while the Russians dissolved the Warsaw Pact and saw it Eastern bloc friends go over to the West.​  Ukraine was the most damaging, led to Crimea annexation and civil war that continues to this day.​ The West stirred things up. Useless idiots.

Tim Weller​  (contact details at the foot)

from Avaaz on Israel-Palestine

As a new round of violence kicks off in Israel-Palestine and more children are killed, it's not enough just to call for another ceasefire. It’s time to take definitive non-violent action to end this decades long nightmare. 

Our governments have failed -- while they have talked peace and passed UN resolutions, they and our companies have continued to aid, trade and invest in the violence. The only way to stop this hellish cycle of Israel confiscating Palestinian lands, daily collective punishment of innocent Palestinian families, Hamas firing rockets, and Israel bombing Gaza is to make the economic cost of this conflict too high to bear. 

We know it works -- when EU countries issued guidelines not to fund the illegal Israeli settlements it caused an earthquake in the cabinet, and when citizens successfully persuaded a Dutch pension fund, PGGM, to withdraw, it created a political storm.

Britain set a bad example - the sad evidence

This, I think, is a corrective to much prejudice in favour of Britain by Brits and how the West is best - but, minus me!

1. Britain was the first with concentration camps in the Boer War that killed over 20,000 women and children.
2. Our scorched earth policy in that war was not noble and the war itself was nothing about protecting these British islands of ours.
3. Next, Churchill turned our warships from being fueled by coal to being driven by oil.  He then saw the domination of the Middle East for oil as the prize to gain world mastery.  Not Hitler, after world mastery but our own beloved Churchill actually did it and used those two words of intent when Hitler was still a boy!  (Source: 'The Prize' by Daniel Yergin)
4. In 1914, Churchill turned a friend into an enemy; he then persuaded the War Cabinet to initiate an attack on that Ottoman Empire and, after months of bloody war, lost catastrophically.
5. According to Admiral Lord West, in his Radio 4 series, 'Britain at Sea', we Brits attacked Russia from 1917, after their defeat/withdrawal in the world war.  This was to gain their re-entry on our side against Germany so that German troops would have to be moved from fighting us to fighting the Russians on the eastern front, once more!  After the November armistice of 11 Nov 1918, we carried on our war with Russia because of their Bolshevik government - totally unacceptable to us fine British folk!
6. Our premature entry into the 1914 World War before we were attacked or about to be attacked was wrong.  It was simply unethical and contrary to all normal standards of decency, especially at that time of far greater church-going and Christian belief.  We should have known better.  Our declaration of war on the 4 August was not self defence.  Our security was not threatened.  It was really all about not wanting to see the status quo, the balance of power, changed on the mainland of Europe.  The war was sold to the public as us gallant Brits coming to the defence of poor, trampled all over, Belgium and teaching the wicked Germans a lesson.  Yet, we had a history of keeping to alliances and treaties only when it suited us at the time.  On 4 August 1914, we over-reacted to an assassination 37 days earlier and, then, on the side of the assassin against the wronged party, Austria-Hungary!  That doubly wrong decision by Asquith, Churchill and Grey, et al had the unfortunate effect of leading to 'Britain's 100 years of War' (see 9, below).  Then and now, we just could not resist keeping our noses out of other countries businesses.  Well, we did know what was best for them, after all, just as we do now over the need for EU reform.
7. Throughout the mad month of July 1914, our government did absolutely nothing to bang heads together on the mainland of Europe to prevent a continental war.  Our very stupid and far too early entry into the war turned it into a worldwide conflagration by virtue of our huge empire.
8. We controlled/dominated 30% of the world with the largest empire in the history of humanity.  This is not something to be proud of.
9. Nor, was our untold riches gleaned from the abominable trade in our fellow members of the human family - the slave trade.  More pernicious deaths in the human family of which we were responsible.  Still no reparations paid.  We pocketed the immoral earnings from our filthy trade and have no intention of returning even a penny to a single African nation.
10. Britain was as anti-Semitic as many other European countries were for centuries.  Germany took it to a new and disgusting level between 1933 and 1945 yet, we did nothing officially to save the Jews and the many other minorities in Germany.  There were a handful of very brave people who did all they could, throughout the war, to shelter Jews.  Our government did nothing.  Yet, Churchill at least, it seems, knew what was going on from before war was declared.
11. Our total war, our saturation fire bombing of German towns, cities and other settlements in the closing months of the war, when our victory was assured, was a war crime.  No regret has ever been whispered by us upstanding Brits, despite our fine British values of high morality!
12. Our armed forces ended up slaughtering many more Germans than they did of our people.
13. 'Britain's 100 years of War' - the four page spread in the Guardian, 12 Feb 2014, of proof and shameful evidence of aggression and killing of foreigners in every single year since the 4 August 1914, if not earlier, to the present.
14. Germany's non-aggressive foreign policy has been excellent and exemplary since 1945 (somewhat undone by its membership of NATO!).  The Germans are, rightly, the respected leaders of the EU.  Their energy and transport policy is also superb and sensible.  We Brits could learn much from them.  Instead, we want out - and the sooner the better.

Who has done the most subjugating?

Mr/s B Parsons believes that the EU is subjugating the UK.  We entered into it voluntarily after a referendum and send representatives to its Parliament every five years.
Over hundreds of years, the UK acquired domination and control over fifty countries by force of arms and kept them subjugated by military power.  We also controlled all the major sea lanes of the world.
All this set a very bad example to Germany that was very late in the game of conquering or claiming nations to build an empire.  Yet, remarkably, those fifty countries still fought for us to stop Germany taking our world control off us in 1914 and 1939 (better the devil you know than the devil you don't know).  To this day, the US/UK, with NATO, remain as the world's dominant power bloc.  Germany is the dominant partner in the EU and Angela Merkel of Germany is the highly respected senior partner in the EU - but, by constraint and not coercion.

To stop more Woolwich killings ...

... stop voting for the war parties, with their men of violence ready to unthinkingly obey their political masters and their policies to invade and occupy Muslim lands without the majority support of the UN Security Council.  We are the USA's biggest ally, supporter and most enthusiastic disciple of bringing freedom and democracy down the barrel of a gun.

It is universally accepted as being socially good behaviour for our young people to make a career in the armed services using violence as our country's official foreign policy in countries that have always left us alone and have never expressed a wish to invade and occupy us, as we have done with them.

Our men of violence must learn to restrain themselves and to be a better and more moral example to those of us who not in uniform.

Vote for the minority peaceful parties even if they have no hope of gaining power.  Support the peaceful men like the Austrian Foreign Minister who is stopping the EU arming the rebels in Syria as the UK and France want.  He said that "the European Union should remain a peace community."