This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Government by Eurocrats: The Olive-Oil Dispenser Debacle
Wolf Richter www.testosteronepit.com www.amazon.com/author/wolfrichter
Like so many debacles in the EU, it started with the unelected European Commission. It’s immune to voters, but not to lobbyists and corporations. Under the guise of “consumer protection” or “food safety” or some other harmless moniker, it generates zany laws that tend to benefit large corporations. But last week, it went too far, even for Europeans – not that they don’t already have enough crises on their hands. It passed a law that banned restaurants from serving olive oil in refillable containers, such as cruets or dipping bowls.
On January 1, 2014, their use would become illegal. Instead, olive oil would have to be served in a one-use-only bottle, labeled in accordance with EU standards, and equipped with a tamper-proof “hygienic” spout. A restaurant owner in Germany, for example, who buys his special olive oil from an artisan producer in Southern France, would be out of luck; that small producer wouldn’t be able to comply with the costly stipulations. The restaurant would have to switch to an industrial supplier that can ship the special restaurant bottles with their tamper-proof spout and EU label. The small producer would be cut out.
The Commission’s decision was made under a Eurocrat procedure, called comitology – though it sounds like it, I’m not making this up! It allows for legislation that is binding for all 27 Member States to be passed into law automatically, without majority support from those Member States.
Exactly! The evil that this new law was supposed to cure: olive oil fraud. Admittedly, it’s a big issue in Europe, in the US, and elsewhere, and some of the largest industrial brands, such as Bertolli, have gotten caught with their pants down. But this law wasn’t going after fraud at the corporate level. On the contrary. It was passed under heavy lobbying from corporate producers.
The law targeted restaurateurs trying to make their own decisions about olive oil. Ostensibly it aimed to protect consumers and their taste buds from cruets or dipping bowls that had been refilled with low-quality or adulterated olive oil ... the kind maybe that big brands like Bertolli and others were sued for selling in California. But when asked if they’d seen any evidence of adulterated olive oil on restaurant tables, an official told the Daily Telegraph, “We don’t have any evidence; it is anecdotal and that was enough for the committee.”
The decision exemplified what’s wrong with EU governance. But there were other issues with the harebrained law. It would create a cesspool of bureaucracy and mountains of additional trash, including the small one-use-only tamper-proof bottles with their spouts, boxes, and containers. And more oil would be wasted as the bottles – much like Ketchup bottles – would be designed to make it impossible to get all the oil out of them.
But this time, the Commission and its process of comitology were greeted with an outburst of loathing and mockery. Criticism was “universal and came from consumers and restaurant owners in all EU countries,” an EU official told the Telegraph. And it came from the very top. “This is exactly the sort of thing that Europe shouldn’t even be discussing,” explained UK Prime Minster David Cameron, with an eye on the real problems that are currently dogging Europe. “It shouldn’t even be on the table, to force a pun – so to speak,” he said. And Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte told his parliament, “I think it is too bizarre for words and incomprehensible to come with this sort of proposal at a time like this.”
European Commission President José Manuel Barroso, son of a small olive oil producer, apparently intervened, and on Thursday, European Agriculture Commissioner Dacian Ciolos threw in the towel. The law provoked some “misunderstanding,” though it was “intended to help consumers, to protect and inform them,” he said. But now that it was “clear that it cannot attract consumer support,” he’d withdraw it.
Not everyone jubilated. “It is totally ludicrous that the commission just withdraws this measure due to political pressure,” said Pekka Pesonen, general secretary of COPA-COGECA, a lobbying group representing industrial producers, and one of the forces behind the law. “Perhaps it wasn’t explained well enough. But it was necessary to ban refillable bottles and the traditional aceiteras found on restaurant tables....” etc. etc.
The thing isn’t dead yet. Ciolos said that he’d have a huddle with opponents and critics of the law in order to somehow resuscitate it – because it’s just too good to let die. So this law about olive oil in restaurants has morphed into a symbol of governance by Eurocrats – and their raggedy efforts to manage the economy of the EU.
As bank lending has dried up in Spain, the government has apparently made it its mission to make the working lives of self-employed workers and small enterprises as difficult as possible by ramping up their tax burden to historic highs. Read.... Black Market or Bust: The Stark Choice Facing Many of Spain’s Self-Employed.
»
- advertisements -
This is reverse fascism - big business telling the government what to do. We have the same thing here in the US - big business hires lobyists who actually write their own self-serving legislation that Congress signs, without reading in some cases. At the local level, cities use zoning and regulations to favor existing businesses at the expense of start up competing business.
That is what traditional fascism did also.
The problem here is control fraud on a grand scale. The private companies are co opting the powers of the state to abuse the public, by buying the regulators and congress critters.
The ironic shit is that when the reset comes they (the private mega corporations) will have idiots in their back pocket that blame govt only. Both the govt and the fed will be blamed (as they should), but the mega corporations role and their profit will be veiled. In the end they along with the mega banks will own the most valuable assets cause they have the superpower of a printing digital press that gives them unlimited $$.
Why is this so hard to see?
To call this communism is going Full RETARD. This is fascism; which is
defined as public-private partnership, and there is a working difference between it and communism, although both have serfdom as their common end.
This obsessive and compulsive faith in that private companies can do no wrong is just as bad as those who pray to a government savior.
In this particular Euro example, the big olive oil companies came up w this regulation to screw the small restaurant owner, small olive oil farmer and the customer.
Monsanto-Goldman-JPMorgan-ChrisDodd President of the United States
I know something about ketchup bottles (Trader Joe's Organic Ketchup). When it gets to be difficult to get out because there is not enough to get it to run to the bottom you add a small amount of water. It works perfect. In the case of oil you use gasoline.
Il est pour votre propre bien, chiennes.
(It is for your own good, bitchez.)
Pidjin French ?
I see the current elites as planetary parasites. All the money in the world cannot fill the emptiness in their souless existence. When they are done with this planet, they will of course be the first ones to afford to fly in outer space. Then they will establish themselves on a new planet once they have raped, pillaged and destroyed this one. And their planet hopping will contine, leaving nothing but destruction in their wake. A new form of inter-planetary sociopathology, that can only be stopped by them turning on each other or some alien species intervening. When they are gone from this one, we must make sure they will never come back. They will be persona non grata to this planet.
Or perhaps it is our own fault? Edmund Burke might have known.
"The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing"
“Breaking news: Obama Destroys the Bill of Rights on Memorial day
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/2013/05/summary-of-bill-of-rights-on-memorial.html”
Isn't it jolly that this kind of dross is all concentrated in Brussels?
“It is totally ludicrous that the commission just withdraws this measure due to political pressure,” said Pekka Pesonen, general secretary of COPA-COGECA, a lobbying group representing industrial producers, and one of the forces behind the law.
This is how a global lobbyist thinks. Note his distaste for "political" - i.e. what people really want and think - democracy is something that can bought, eh?
Nevertheless, note the case: the commission proposes, parliament and the council (the national governments) approve/reject. Here the commission retracts thanks to a press campaign...
... and if you read the Telegraph, you get the impression there is an Olive Oil SWAT team running amok
but who cares? An article like this has just to start with "unelected European Commission", job done, facts are irrelevant...
Not exactly; the "relevant fact" is that its an UNELECTED EUROPEAN COMMISSION. And; if you can still think straight; it should not exist.
and David Cameron is an elected... Member of Parliament, by 30'000 votes. but he is Prime Minister by majority in parliament (in coalition with the Liberal Democrats, then the Conservatives did not achieve a majority in 2010)
meanwhile the EU Commission has to be appointed by Cameron and the rest of the Council, and approved by the EU parliament
so perhaps you might be thinking straight... past the concepts of parliamentarism and the confederational setup of the EU
Sorry Ghordius but that is not true. There are two forms of EU legislation The Directive and The Regulation.
Article 288 Treaty on Functioning of the European Union (TEC)
To exercise the Union's competences, the institutions shall adopt regulations, directives, decisions, recommendations and opinions.
A regulation shall have general application. It shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
A directive shall be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member State to which it is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods.
A decision shall be binding in its entirety upon those to whom it is addressed.
Recommendations and opinions shall have no binding force."
In the case of the UK, a Directive is often debated in Parliament and a UK Law is passed as if it were something proposed by the UK Government accountable to UK Voters.
A REGULATION is NOT debated in Parliament but issued by Decree in the form of a Statutory Instrument through the Privy Council under Secondary Legislation or Enabling Act.
It passes directly into UK Law and by-passes Parliamentary Debate or Vote
I'm not sure I can follow the reasons of your differentiation, here (yes, I did mistake the law - it did pass, so your "it's not true" is correct, there)
both directives and regulations have to pass both a Council and an EU parliament vote, and the decision which path to take is both on the grounds of if it's something for which the EU is responsible (i.e. common market) or, often, political
In this case, olive oil is a product both produced and consumed in the EU, so regulation is the "normal path" you would expect. And olive oil is a product that is regularly falsified by criminal bands, so sentiment is that some (imo smart) regulation is needed (with the usual S/N cultural "food fight" divide, of course)
the truth is that in the Council vote The Government of Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands - which responds to the Dutch Parliament - was against
But The Government of Her Britannic Majesty - which responds to the British Parliament - voted... did actually not vote. I repeat, Cameron, the Prime Minister of the UK, abstained
Nevertheless, it went through council vote, which means there were three kinds of majorities to obtain (what's wrong about the calculator, Urban Redneck? imo a great thing) - and then it went through EU parliament, where UKIP voted... actually, they always abstain from voting, out of principle
imho the real truth behind those facts is that the WSJ, the Telegraph, Forbes and a few Dutch publications could not care less about how oil is poured in restaurants. Their scope is to pour oil on the fires of the debate about the UK leaving the EU
not long ago Gideon Rachman wrote on the FT a comment aptly named "Why I shifted sides in the UK's civil war over Europe" where he recaps a lot - including Lord Lawson's premises and push for leaving - but does not mention that the pro-/anti-EU sentiment divides all UK parties except one: the UKIP. If you are interested, go to The Slog Blog and read how he thinks this is all about internal conservative politics in the UK
personally, I think the UK should somehow find soon a solution to this "civil war". there are way more important things to be tackled. the UK wants to leave? just do it. on the continent sentiment is way past the moment to care about, and British (and in part Dutch, but this is even more complex) politics are imho incompatible with continental ones, the first being more confrontational and the second being more consensus-seeking
yet again: Cameron and/or his cabinet (and/or the British Parliament) did not care (or vote). the UKIP did not care... or vote. the rest of the UK conservatives in the EU parliament don't care enough about, too, then they did leave the conservative parliamentary bloc made out of all other european conservative parties, and so marginalized themselves
so it is safe to say that the UK conservatives are leaving the EU - in great part out of disinterest, but also out of an old/new loss of the capability and will of engaging other conservatives on the continent in discourse. I repeat as often: in their view, the UK deserves leadership, it's demeaned by parity, has nothing to seek in an Europe of Peer Nations
It may bypass the UK Parliament, but David Cameron had a vote, and the Human Teletubby pulled a Barak Obama and voted "present." The article I linked to above has a painfully detailed explanation of the procedure used in this case.
But if Cameron actually believed his own BULLSHIT that- “This is exactly the sort of thing that Europe shouldn’t even be discussing,” and “It shouldn’t even be on the table, to force a pun – so to speak,” then he should have at least VOTED AGAINST it.
It appears they couldn't even find a simple majority of EU States that thought this regulation was a bad idea in the first place- until the large public outcry after they voted to implement the regulation (but it probably didn't hurt the repeal effort that Barroso had a suspicious conflict of interest).
It is QMV that passes in the Council of Ministers and it is not Cameron but the DEFRA Secretary of State Owen Paterson or one of his deputies
if they had any interest they would have had a cabinet vote - but there it is, they aren't interested. and if even one minister feels it is important, she/he can shift the Qualified voting upwards, but again, they aren't interested
When hearing about the "olive oil" legislation first reaction was wtf but the very first article I read about it mentioned that this legislation was being "supported" by big players in the food industry. I thought at the time it would be interesting to follow the money and find out exactly who was behind this proposed legistlation.
I thought this act of political prostitution was being executed through the implementing act loophole? Which raises the question of what exactly the Council did previously that "shall lay down in advance the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers."
http://capreform.eu/eu-to-ban-reusable-olive-oil-bottles-in-restaurants/
In fainess, I must be pretty dim since I actually need an online calculator to figure out what majority means in Eurospeak... in case they bring this back as a legislative act next year.
Reminds me of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Not answerable to anyone, but visited by droves of lobbyists.
Ain't big government grand?
Too bad they don't apply that "non-refillable" idea to QE, bail outs and government bull shit..
Welcome , Europe, to the same kind of shitty uber-gov. under which U.S. citizens have been living for decades. I was always against the E.U. because - I told my mom she should have named me Cassandra - there are no checks and balances and all European states would lose (give away) their national sovereignty. Hope you guys are happy having industry write your legislation for you, with no voter input whatsoever. We in the U.S. just LOVE this type of crap governance. We willingly gave all of our rights over to industry, via CONgress, SCOTUS and the Imperial President of the United States long ago. Surely you can see how we're thriving under despotic rule! Just get in, shut up and hang on for Mr. Toads Wild Ride. It's gonna be a blast!! Really!! Don't you believe me?
You didn't invent it. We had in it Europe in the 1600s with Crown Corporations and Royal Charters like the East India Company and Cornwall Tin Monopoly. Two world wars made it complete as Unilever wrote the rule book on Sausages POST-WAR to reduce meat content and redefine "meat". That is why a pork sausage in the UK need only contain 65% pork whatever part of the pig "pork" might be in the slurry that passes for meat.
Ice Cream injected with air brought to you from the same Unilver combine. Food adulteration has been reduced in the UK since the EU raised standards, but it goes on whenever regulations are ignored and frankly the British would eat their own excrement so long as it was packaged in a lovely box and sold on a Two-For-One basis
The fascist nanny state strikes again. Only this time the people struck back and the EUrocrats put their tails between their legs and ran for cover. Lesson learned. Go after them for every bill they pass. Can one still buy tar and feathers in the EU? Pitchforks? 'nuff said.
@Wolf
Seems you missed the FaRage rant on this :
Nigel Farage: I hope taxpayers all over Europe listen to this ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ucb2iyPI1nE
Exact point in video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Ucb2iyPI1nE#t=112s
Here's a great article from Casey research on how Portugal's economy was crushed by the EU as a "condition" for entry. The Politburo's steel-tipped boot in the balls of fine local industries.
http://www.caseyresearch.com/cdd/marx-madness
Let me just explain the fisheries example:
With Portugal's entry into the EU, the number of fishermen in Europe doubled; at the same time, with Spain's entry, the fishing capacity of the European fleet doubled. This because Portuguese fisheries was mostly artisanal, while Spanish was (and still is) moslty industrial. So guess which one was forced to sacrifice its fleet... and guess who the prime-minister largely responsible for that was? The Portuguese one, obviously, and the current president, of course... the very same one that now advocates for a "return to the seas" - yeah, right...
Similar with farming and industry, btw.
Obviously, being an American, it's all down to the dreaded, evil plotting "communists", even though all of it (and then some) has been exclusively for the benefit of... capitalists - but pretty sure they have nothing to do with it...
Btw, he forgot Portuguese alert levels: they range from "What a Drag" to "What a Drag".
His conclusion - technology is going to save the world.
I wonder about that?
only if they keep the Free Shit Army supplied with Obamaphones
The EC is in the pockets of big corporations. The EU Common Agricultural Policy favors big land owners and big agri-business. The EC wants to privatize water supply under the banner of "lower prices and better quality" while we all know that exactly the opposite will happen. They also want to bring GMO onto the European market while most Europeans are against it, etc.
The thing with this really stupid olive oil case is that it is a welcome distraction for the EC from the real problems in Europe and from the fact that EU countries need to pay for an increased EU budget while these countries themselves need to tighten the belt. Instead of the debate in Europe going about that, attention was given to a non-issue concerning olive oil (although it is a case of favoring big corporations).
+100
At least there _is_ some olive oil.
Anyone remember Tino De Angelis and Allied Crude Vegetable Oil?
Who could ever forget him, especially American Express?
oil floats like in "floating a loan"? classic comment--- a + 1000 and lmfao --
Another kind of liquid might be the liquidation of the European Commission. Surprised it hasn't already happened.
Why don't they just put a tamper proof valves on everyones mouth and ass and then they could just do the bulk feeding thing. It would be way more environmentally friendly.
Whats the matter with you people? They did this for our own good.
Just think of all the children who will be protected from non-compliant olive oil!
I don't know about you, but I like mine oiled up...
That's just wrong, William
So why am I laughing?
Fret not greedy euro industrialists, as all hope is not lost, for Portugal, that eternal beacon of European "model-studentry" for all things wrong, is on your side and has already declared it will continue to enforce this measure, which it single-handedly introduced all the way back in 2006.
Forward, fascists! Hurrah!
This nightmare never ends. One day soon children wear be wearing helmets 24/7. Probably have Google glass built in for "safety"/
meanwhile muslims take over their countries unopposed.
Yes...but at least they have their priorities straight ;-)
"Swedish parking laws, however, continue to be rigidly enforced despite the increasingly chaotic situation. Early Wednesday, while documenting the destruction after a night of rioting in the Stockholm suburb of Alby, a reporter from Fria Tider observed a parking enforcement officer writing a ticket for a burnt-out Ford."
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/sweden-cowardice-riots/
reminds me of the movie Demolition Man---
Oh, your car got burned down? Then I guess we'll have to tow it to the impound.
Then there's the storage fees.
Then there's the hazardous cargo surcharge..
Then there's the CO2 surcharge on emissions during the fire..
Then there's the local ecological remediation fees..
Now, remember, we are a free and tolerant society.
Awww, Man! No more loogying into the olive oil containers. No fair!
Oh well, at least I can continue to stick cigarette butts into the dinner rolls that they recycle from one table to the next.
They let us sink but at last they've saved olive oil!
Hey Brussels bureau-rats you deserve a raise!!
Perhaps they should take Ciolo and but him in a sealed bottle.
WB7,
Sealed bottle? Yes, yes yes. But not before running him through an olive press.
Perhaps the sensible thing would be to make it compulsory for restaurants to provide a choice between sealed bottles v the current practice. The consumer can then decide for himself depending on his tastes, suspicions and public health worries.
It's amazing though that much more attention is being paid to the contents of the oil bottle than to the contents of the ECB's collection of dud bonds.