UKIP Resources site launched

johnwest · 02-03-2005, 03:27 PM

Very good site!

Percy the Poodle · 02-03-2005, 05:38 PM

Great idea! Thanks for another gr8 site Anthony.

UKIP MAN · 03-03-2005, 07:44 AM

Bluemerle wrote:

Quote:

Apologies UKIP man, I didn't mean to upset you. You are doing a great job and we all make typos. :cry:

axepted.

Intbel wrote:

Quote:

Amazing where some o' my graphics end up, ain't it?

>cough<

was it you Intbel who has been following me around taking photo's :roll:

spaman · 03-03-2005, 09:14 AM

Excellent site - really hits the nail on the head. It's specific and answers the questions........ Well Done !

In it you say:

Quote:

For example, it was directive 91/440 that caused the break up of British rail, whilst the congestion charge in central London can be traced back to directive 99/62. Even the ending of the 192 Directory Enquiry Service was a requirement of another EU directive.

I find these points very surprising....... and this stuff is not well known....... Time it was all out in the public domain

...........and - let's have the full expose - what else have they signed away

Intbel · 03-03-2005, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UKIP MAN

was it you Intbel who has been following me around taking photo's :roll:

Now who would want to take pics of you?

Thanks for the link, btw.

It will be reciprocated ... will be doing some more site stuff at the weekend ...

Sheila · 03-03-2005, 12:44 PM

Quote

"the congestion charge in central London can be traced back to directive 99/62"

How exactly? I have just read that directive and I can't see the connection.

Paul Birch · 03-03-2005, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheila

"the congestion charge in central London can be traced back to directive 99/62"
How exactly? I have just read that directive and I can't see the connection.

Can you post the directive in question, or a direct link to it, please?

mkpdavies · 03-03-2005, 01:32 PM

http://www.europarl.eu.int/facts/4_5_4_en.htm

Quote:

Tax harmonisation
VAT and excise duties
Agreement has been reached on VAT on transport services. There has also been some harmonisation of excise duties on fuels, with the adoption of Council Directive 92/81 and 92/82 of 19 October 1992 on rates of excise duties on mineral oils.
Charging of infrastructure costs
Directive 99/62 of 17 June 1999 , on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures, seeks to eliminate distortion of competition and provides for taxes on motor vehicles, with maximum and minimum rates allowing differentiation in favour of less polluting vehicles, tolls and user charges for motorways, multi-lane roads, bridges, tunnels and mountain passes.

Smells like that directive could have had a big influence on the congestion charge to me! Though admitedly the mountain passes may have been ignored.

Sheila · 03-03-2005, 02:53 PM

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/...en00420050.pdf

It refers to HGV vehicles only -

vehicle ’means a motor vehicle or articulated vehicle
combination intended exclusively for the carriage of goods
by road and having a maximum permissible gross laden
weight of not less than 12 tonnes;

and only on certain types of roads

2.(a)Tolls and user charges shall be imposed only on users of
motorways or other multi-lane roads with characteris-
tics similar to motorways,or users of bridges,tunnels
and mountain passes.

although it could apply to other types of road in countries which don't have a motorway network.

I still don't see how the congestion charge, current or proposed, is relevant to this legislation.

mkpdavies · 03-03-2005, 03:01 PM

I agree it probably didn't have any real effect on it, as I think it was 100% Red Kens baby. Though I bet he looked at the directive as a guideline.

However, I can see why someone would think otherwise, without reading the full definitions of what vehicle or road types were included.

Without the defintitions of what a vehicle means, or road, you would think it was related. As these definitions are not given out everytime the directive is quoted, it would be an easy mistake to make.

Does go to show you how things can be misused or misinterpreted though.

03-03-2005, 03:01 PM	#20 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,849 Party: Libertarian Party	I agree it probably didn't have any real effect on it, as I think it was 100% Red Kens baby. Though I bet he looked at the directive as a guideline. However, I can see why someone would think otherwise, without reading the full definitions of what vehicle or road types were included. Without the defintitions of what a vehicle means, or road, you would think it was related. As these definitions are not given out everytime the directive is quoted, it would be an easy mistake to make. Does go to show you how things can be misused or misinterpreted though. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

02-03-2005, 03:27 PM	#11 (permalink)
johnwest Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Suffolk Posts: 827 Party: UKIP	Very good site!

02-03-2005, 05:38 PM	#12 (permalink)
Percy the Poodle Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: East Devon Posts: 362	Great idea! Thanks for another gr8 site Anthony.

03-03-2005, 12:44 PM	#16 (permalink)
Sheila Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Reading Posts: 579	Quote "the congestion charge in central London can be traced back to directive 99/62" How exactly? I have just read that directive and I can't see the connection.

03-03-2005, 02:53 PM	#19 (permalink)
Sheila Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Reading Posts: 579	http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/...en00420050.pdf It refers to HGV vehicles only - vehicle ’means a motor vehicle or articulated vehicle combination intended exclusively for the carriage of goods by road and having a maximum permissible gross laden weight of not less than 12 tonnes; and only on certain types of roads 2.(a)Tolls and user charges shall be imposed only on users of motorways or other multi-lane roads with characteris- tics similar to motorways,or users of bridges,tunnels and mountain passes. although it could apply to other types of road in countries which don't have a motorway network. I still don't see how the congestion charge, current or proposed, is relevant to this legislation.