European Ombudsman and reply

[whipitup]

My interpretation of that letter is that the ombudsman is saying that your complaint about rushed amendments, or that Article 18 was really a new article, or that the TPD is not impartial are actually complaints about the Quality (Merit) of the regulation and not complaints about a specific rule or regulation being breached

*TOTALLY MADE UP EURO RULE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES*
Rule 666b: Any MEP wishing to put forward legislation must first have a Tattoo of Satan on his Scrotum, and must gargle with Satanic sperm before speaking in the commision.

If for example a New rule was passed saying that Goldfish must henceforth be known as "Mostly Orange, but ocasionally other colours fish" and it turned out that the MEP who proposed the law did not have the requisite tattoo then that would be Maladministration because a required step or condition had not been met.

However if the MEP did have the tattoo, but you complained on the grounds that a: It's a fucking stupid rule, b: It was knocked up in 10 minutes in the wine bar to ensure that everything else in the bigger bill passed. Then the Ombudsman could say that all the requirements have been met therefore there is no complaint to answer because being a stupid rule and being rushed are Qualities (Merits) not procedural requirements...

I know it's bollocks, they know it's bollocks, You know it's bollocks, but providing they jump through the correct procedural hoops the ombudsman will just shrug and eat another choccy/snail/bratwurst/small child...

That's depressing...............

 

[Tubbyengineer]

That's depressing...............

Thats Europolitics, the depressing thing is that most politics is like that...

 

[vaporsizer]

View attachment 18952

Without going right off topic.. There actually IS a fourth monkey ,'Do no evil'. It was removed by some culture somewhere, can't remember the whole story now but hey, it figures.

 

[Szaxe]

My interpretation of that letter is that the ombudsman is saying that your complaint about rushed amendments, or that Article 18 was really a new article, or that the TPD is not impartial are actually complaints about the Quality (Merit) of the regulation and not complaints about a specific rule or regulation being breached .

After a careful examination of your complaint, it appears that this condition is not met, because the complaint does not concern a possible instance of maladministration, but the merits of Union legislation.

Article 18 is not European Union Legislation, it is a proposal put together by the Commission ... badly ...

 

[Tubbyengineer]

Article 18 is not European Union Legislation, it is a proposal put together by the Commission ... badly ...

Again thats the problem, good or bad isnt the issue, if they followed procedure the ombudsman won't do anything.

We all know this a pile of crap whipped into the shape of a article but until someone can show procedural irregularites then Mssr Ombudsman will do nothing....

 

[Doofry]

It is a pity that the tabloids are not up to speed and in our corner with regards to ecigs, as media coverage in this could put a spanner in the Commission's works.
What about Mr Farage or someone equally as able to take the fight to the EU?
These are just my thoughts, i know enough that we are being bummed over the barrel, but not enough to go with/against the politicians (if that makes sense?).

 

[Szaxe]

Again thats the problem, good or bad isnt the issue, if they followed procedure the ombudsman won't do anything.

We all know this a pile of crap whipped into the shape of a article but until someone can show procedural irregularites then Mssr Ombudsman will do nothing....

They didn't follow procedures correctly, it is not correct to misinterpret the information put to Members of Parliament (just one point) ..... But we could go round and round here. The point is I made a complaint that alleged the inclusion of an article added by the Commission was done so in an incorrect manner, I will not go through all the reasons for this, but read the code, it includes many obligations that were not or could not have been followed within in the Commissions timetable.

 

[Tubbyengineer]

In that case, a specific chapter and paragraph reference in the reply should help matters, but I wont hold my breath...

 

[Chegs]

There are provable grounds for the Ombudsman to act

The TPD is supposed to have undergone consultation....the ORIGINAL proposal may have,but the version that is being rushed through asap most certainly wasn't subjected to any consultation,public or private.

 

[Ninjaassasin1983]

its simply a case of they refuse to see the truth because they have selfish reasons for wanting the ban to go ahead they can't say the evidence isn't there the studies have been done and continue to be done by Dr Farsalinos and its getting to a point where you have to wonder are they really so stupid or are the being deliberately obtuse?