There are around two dozen MEPs who are members of a US lobbying organisation, the American Legislative Exchange Council. There appears to be a concerted attempt by these MEPs to hide their links to this group by refusing to comply with the Code of Conduct under which their membership of this lobbying group should be declared in the Register of Interests http://www.na-saighneain.com/.
Despite a formal complaint submitted to the President of the European Parliament in June 2012 no action has been taken against these MEPs to ensure compliance.
In order for voters to make meaningful decisions as to whom to vote for it is imperative that we know whether our elected representatives have real or potential conflicts of interest that may affect their work for us the electorate.
If the Parliamentary authorities won’t enforce their own rules and regulations we need to show them that this is unacceptable.
Here’s how Homebase view the workfare programme:
they obviously need the taxpayer subsidy:
Dan Hannan is one of the corrupt Tory MEPs who think that registers of interest are not worth the paper they’re printed on. They are not alone it would seem:
And he even seems to have a similar approach to the truth as that exhibited by Hannan:
Just in case he’s thinking of taking legal action against me, the truth is what it is:
note ALEC’s own phraseology: ‘most of our international members…’
Here is a ‘government-funded’ workfare company advertising ‘free labour’
What did the Republican who ran for nomination to run as their 1996 presidential candidate say to French workers?
“Titan is going to buy a Chinese tyre company or an Indian one, pay less than one euro per hour wage and ship all the tyres France needs. You can keep the so-called workers. Titan has no interest in the Amiens North factory”
On the Andrew Marr show on BBC IDS was speaking about the Poundland case in which Cait Reilly was forced to work in a Poundland store for two weeks and thus had to abandon a voluntary position at a museum. During the interview he said:
‘She was paid jobseeker’s allowance by the taxpayer to do this.’
thereby confirming what most had known all along that, far from being an individually-tailored training scheme, the Work programme is nothing other than Workfare in which the benificiaries are the companies who get a free workforce at taxpayer expense.
An attempt at illegal eviction:
