eurealist.co.uk

Ian Barber, Acting Head of the European Commission in the UK writes in the Telegraph about the grounding of Sally B. He says it is important to understand that the rules were introduced. After September 11, many airline companies found their cover to be inadequate and in several countries the state was obliged to assume the role of insurer. To prevent this happening again, new laws were approved by EU governments and the European Parliament introduced minimum insurance requirements that all aircraft owners are now obliged to take out. Surely it is not being suggested that planes fly without adequate insurance?

Ian Barber is perhaps missing the point the Sally B is not an airliner, it is a World War II bomber as such it is ridiculous to insist that it must fit the criteria set for air liners that carry passengers.
Nobody is suggesting that airliners should fly without insurance, but the question might be asked why individual businesses should be asked to foot the bill for the protection from terrorist actions that are the responsibility of the state. Or why those rules should not be applied reasonably in this situation, the one size fits all preference of the EU has many drawbacks if applied in the way ther appear to be. Another question might be if the EU is so concerned about terrorists why is it that they have clearly financed terrorist organisations in the Middle East.

Ian Barber also says these rules were voted on by British ministers and MEPs, who were intrinsically involved throughout the legislative process, but was the British parliament I think not. And what control do we the British people have on the Council of ministers, who as a body are not responsible to anyone, the MEPs are elected by the people but how is that democratic as they do not offer us a set of policies from which to choose in fact it is a case of vote for me and I will do what I wish.