Boris wins: Europe trembles
A beaming new Boris smiles out and salutes from many a European newspaper, but I don't think they are giving his victory the space that they should.
Some of the international media have their own particular take, like this in the Azerbaijan press: "Boris Johnson is Turkish-origin British. He is great grandson of last interior minister of the Ottoman Empire Ali Kemal."
But it's not Boris's origins but the omens that matter to Europe.
It's not that the European press will be awaiting the unzipping of Boris's lips or waiting on tenterhooks for future follies to see if he will feed what he calls the "Hyrcanian tigers" of the media with frank and forthright views.
Not when we have the new mayor of Rome declaring the return of the Falange.
Nor is the significance that Britain has embraced a political power structure more common on the continent and across the Atlantic.
Here, city bosses are real powers in the land and their party. Indeed, in many places you need a local power base to make it on the national stage.
The Tony effect
It was, of course, Tony what done it.
Blair wanted to reinvigorate local politics with charismatic individuals and engage the voters.
This contest was the first in Britain for an age where both contenders were known by their first name, so he's done it in spades.
It'll be interesting to see in the future if a successful run as mayor impels the occupant into a top cabinet job or the party leadership.
Indeed, I would keep a close eye on what Ken does next.
It's not that Boris has passionate views on Europe. Indeed, although he's more famous for going to Eton, he went to the European School here in Brussels for a while, when his dad (later a Tory MEP) was working for the commission.
Later, as the Telegraph's man in Brussels, his witty dispatches hammered home the idea of a wasteful and bureaucratic European Union in the British public's mind.
But Boris's victory, along with the local election results, mean a great deal for the European Union.
I don't agree with Le Monde that "after Italy, Britain" turns to the right and that it's a sea change for the whole of Europe. The victory of the Spanish socialists could point in the opposite direction and anyway New Labour is further to the right (whatever that means these days) than many alleged parties of the right in Europe.
But Spain's El Pais has it right: proclaiming that David Cameron is on course for Downing Street.
During my years as a political correspondent, I would hedge ever prediction with caution. You have to when watching a story close up and following every twist and turn. During an election campaign you have to suspend, if not disbelief, a degree of common sense judgment in order to treat the parties fairly.
But my long view from Brussels is that the combination of a worsening economy, a sense of "time for a change", a restless media, a fixed public image of an inept Prime Minister combined with some really clunky decision making, and it is very difficult to see how Labour can win the next election.
Cameron and the EU
If David Cameron becomes the next British Prime Minister, it could mean a profound change in the relations with the European Union. Although he clearly doesn't want Europe to be one of the high profile campaign issues, it will be forced up the agenda.
If the Lisbon treaty is signed and sealed before a Conservative victory, some Conservatives, including the shadow foreign secretary, will not regard this as the end of the matter.
As I've written before, it will be one of David Cameron PM's first big decisions whether to occupy the first months of his first term with a high profile battle about Britain's place in the European Union, or whether to disappoint supporters.
Next year will tell us much. Mr Cameron tried to form a new political grouping within the European Parliament last year and failed.
He has promised that there will be one next year, in time to fight the European elections in the autumn. Here's the argument for such a group from one of its the main supporters.
That contest will be, perhaps rightly, seen through a Westminster prism and what It means for the general election the following year.
But hard questions will be asked about the Conservatives approach to Europe, Labour will be desperate to re-ignite the old Tory civil war and the tone of the campaign will tell us much about Cameron's approach to the European Union: something that could be decisive for his first few months In office If he does become prime minister.
I’m Mark Mardell, the BBC's North America editor. These are my reflections on American politics, some thoughts on being a Brit living in the USA, and who knows what else? My 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~31~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
As a foreigner living in UK, I don't understand why the low turnouts in British elections is not a matter of public concern.
I see there's not much campaign inciting the citizens to vote. Do the public powers care?
Can you consider enough representative a 37 per cent turn out like there was in the last local elections?
I know that you are an old Democracy and your electorate may be exausted of so many Elections over your recent history. But is not participation the most important principles of a Democracy?
At least I live in London, where the turnout has been considerably higher: 45 per cent, which anyway it doesn't reach a minimal half of the electorate, the socalled quorum.
I don't question the poor turnouts, which can be explained by several reasons. I'm amazed by the silence in the British press and the government about this phenomenon that puts in strain the basic concept of Democracy.
Complain about this comment
Europe trembles?
Boris who?
Complain about this comment
By the way, Mark, I think your post title is sort of disproportionate.
Fortunately Europe is not longer depending on how much UK wants to be in.
It's up to you, by referendum or not, to decide if UK integrates more inside EU.
As the euro currency success has demonstrated, Europe can move on even without UK.
Complain about this comment
Mark:
A excellent blog about London's New Mayor,
Boris Johnson......
Question: How did you find out about
the Azerbaijan press commentary about Boris Johnson.
Complain about this comment
Boris never expected to actually win. After all he does'nt strike as having a high attention level. That's why I suspect that he praised red Ken so much. I can only imagine his antics trying to juggle with rats. Ken for all his faults
had a grasp on London after all he was leader of the GLC before he became mayor.
With so many diverse problems including the oncoming olympic games our Boris will soon be found wanting. As for his impact on Europe I would say that'll be a damp squib too. The EU will survive without the UK but the UK will suffer greatly out of it. Boris has little more than hype to see him through and that'll wear thin as soon as the actual hits the fan!
Complain about this comment
As a European resident I am often struck by the 'Fog in the channel, Europe cut off' effect that is very much a part of British politics still.
Very few people here care what is happening in the UK; for Europeans Britain has often seemed concerned only with getting the best deal for itself rather than making a real contribution to the greatest political experiment for centuries, a united, free and democratic Europe. At least Mr Blair made Europe an important part of his agenda - the conservatives have and always will be Euro-sceptics so I see very little hope for a more integrated Britain in Europe with the accession of B Johnson to Mayor of London.
Ask the many retirees in France what they think of the pounds recent performance against the euro which trades in a zone of over 400 million Europeans unaffected by swings in other currencies.
Complain about this comment
Mark, You erroneously wrote: "It's not that Boris has passionate views on Europe".
As you are usually very well read (and briefed), I am surprised you didn't know of Boris's 2006 book about the EU called 'The Dream of Rome'. I would have thought this thoughtful (and enjoyable) book would have been essential reading for anyone interested in UK/EU relations.
(BTW - what has happened to the layout of your blog today? Maybe the 'powers that beeb' are upset that one of their reporters has acknowledged that the Brown/Nu Labour government is - to use a pan-European term - kaput).
Complain about this comment
Dear Betuil
There are clearly more things dividing Britain from the rest of Europe than 20 miles of sea and a currency. Mark's use of the headline "Boris wins: Europe trembles" is not serious, he is joking. This kind of deprecatory (pun intended) humour is common among English people who like nothing more than belittling themselves and public figures for comic effect (after all Boris is comic effect personified).
Also, turnout in local elections is always much lower than in general elections when the turnout is usually around 70%. The truth is that the British in general are not that much interested in politics. But despite this (or perhaps because of it) Britain has, in modern times (i.e. since 1689) at least, a history of political stability and absence of revolution and dictatorship that is the envy of more "political" nations.
Complain about this comment
Dear Betuil
There are clearly more things dividing Britain from the rest of Europe than 20 miles of sea and a currency. Mark's use of the headline "Boris wins: Europe trembles" is not serious, he is joking. This kind of deprecatory (pun intended) humour is common among English people who like nothing more than belittling themselves and public figures for comic effect (after all Boris is comic effect personified).
Also, turnout in local elections is always much lower than in general elections when the turnout is usually around 70%. The truth is that the British in general are not that much interested in politics. But despite this (or perhaps because of it) Britain has, in modern times (i.e. since 1689) at least, a history of political stability and absence of revolution and dictatorship that is the envy of more "political" nations.
Complain about this comment
What you really mean Mark is you and your small group of pro EU fans are scared of the tories getting into power.Once the treaty is signed its either break it and upset the eu or point to the exit door, bring it on.Plus with this court appeal going on its not over to the fat lady sings .down with the EU.We may still get a vote on it.Why does the BBC play the pro EU vote when its not wanted
Complain about this comment
betuli - The right to *NOT* vote is just as important as the right to vote !! Voting under the threat of Law is the same as voting at the point of a gun !! Both remove the freedom of choice from the citizen !!
However, if a citizen chooses *NOT* to vote, then he can't complain that the wrong person was voted into office !! If he disagreed so strongly with the candidate, then he should have exercised his vote against him !! :-)
Complain about this comment
English Eurosceptics,
You've got all the right to vote in a referendum on the EU issue.
But the question should be at this stage the proper one: do you want UK inside the EU (Lisbon treaty included, of course) or staying away from EU?
Put the question in such clear terms, and I am not sure that you would reject it. In any case, as I said, EU will continue to move on.
There should not be any opt out available anymore. This obstructive attitude brakes what most Euroeans want.
The rest of Europe is tired of your eternal dilema: to be or not to be.
Nemius,
I see Mark's post title is a joke: but it shows a common misunderstanding among English public opinion: that in the rest of Europe people are extremely concerned about what UK will do.
It's not like this, at least not any more. We will continue spreading the Schengen treaty and the Euro use accross continent, despite the English objections or opt outs. And we will still be happy.
Complain about this comment
ishkandar,
I'm not talking about introducing the compulsory vote, which is not a common practice in other Democracies. So I do not understand why you introduce this issue.
What I miss is a public campaign over the importance of the citizen's vote or a debate about why people feel so distanced from the nearest politics, that's local elections. Nothing else.
Complain about this comment
Mark,
What would be the implications of the policies you mentioned above regarding Cameron for English people living and working in other EU countries.
What options do we have to fight back at such short-sighted policies.
(What impact would this have on my 13 year old who just spent the last 3 years battling to learn German and to fit in with the local culture? )
Complain about this comment
i love the way the british public read a long article, especially from a bbc reporter and jump to totally diametric opinions about it. you are accused of being to pro europe and at the same time excessivly eurosceptic! does this make you laugh or cry?
Complain about this comment
If the rest of Europe is not concerned with the attitude of the British why do you persist in writting about it? Do you no concider time spent lecturing the British on what we should or should not do and when we should or should not take action is a waste of your time because we will make the important decisions on europe when the people have made their choice, whether by general election or referendum we will decide whether we desire to give up soveignty of our nation in order to join a united europe or whether we joined the EU for the reasons it was created, the ecconomic gain of all our nations.
Complain about this comment
William Hague and the Conservatives have done a good job in Opposition calling for the promised referendum and in saying they will not let matters rest if a treaty without any democratic legitimacy is ratified. However it remains to be seen what the party will offer in their next election manifesto on this issue. The EU problem is bigger than just the Lisbon treaty so holding a post-ratification referendum on that treaty alone would not be sufficient. A true solution requires a fundamental re-negotiation of our membership back to one based on trade and it is this which the Conservatives should commit to achieving in their first term. The incoming government should immediately enter negotiations making it clear to our partners that there is a 1-year timeframe to achieve success. If the talks are successful the Conservatives should put the results to referendum in the UK. If the talks fail the government should commence the 2-year countdown to EU exit described in the Lisbon treaty and include a commitment in their next manifesto to a referendum in the following parliament to confirm the then status-quo. This would neutralise the EU issue in the run up to a Conservative 2nd-term and allow for a period of time to disprove the myths of pro-EU scare mongers who will claim (as they did on the single-currency) that they sky will fall in should we distance ourselves from Brussels.
The Conservatives must recognise that this is not an issue which can be ducked. Every new EU law replaces not just national law but also the ability of Parliament to legislate in the area covered by the new EU law. And once EU legislation is on the statute books no-one we elect can propose any changes to that law (this being a monopoly of the EU Commissioner). The inevitable and automatic result of this process is that a time will come, perhaps decades hence, when the House of Commons is inhibited from legislating at all by the ever-swelling body of EU law and our national elections will decide nothing of consequence. This is the automatic conveyer belt to the United States of Europe that Monnet designed and it is doing the job exactly as he intended. If the Conservatives waste a period in power from say 2010-2020 without renegotiating our membership, then the conveyer will be very far advanced indeed before there is another chance (say in the 2030s).
Complain about this comment
Labour should now quickly move to the promised reform of the election laws. Only PR can exclude clowns like Johnson who owe their "success" to the media hype only.
Londoners have just made a serious mistake, but it's their right! Shame for the Olympic Games, though. It would have required the best mayor in the world to pull this one out of certain disaster. Johnson just doesn't seem to have any real qualities in terms of organisation, inclusion and any other aspect required here.
Concerning the EU, I am with Mark that the UK is once more moving away from Europe.
In combination with the faltering UK bubble economy, the constant humiliations by the Yanks or the Croatian footballers and the Pound losing value against the Euro, this is a good thing for the EU. Because the Brits have been a constant pain in the neck, without contributing much. It's time that England leaves the EU (Scotland would probably stay), so that the EU can face the real challenges. And those are not the xenophobic complexes of MM Johnson and Cameron (or the rest of the Bullingdon posse of upper class twits).
What's the point of having the UK as an EU-Partner when it is run by people who just won't accept foreigners as equals?
Complain about this comment
The Conservatives are back in power, at least on local level. I'm not sure the Conservatives will win the next national elections. In 2006 the Dutch Labour Party celebrated a big local election victory. Less then a year later they suffered a huge defeat in national elections. Their support decreased with nearly 50% and the most impopular party, the CDA, was the big winner. Could this happen in the UK to?
Euroskepticism has several gradations: some are against the European Union as a whole, some argue she needs serious reform and the remaining part could not care less about the subject. I agree the European Union needs serious reform. On this moment their's no serious opposition, exept a few fascists, in the European Parliament. We need a European political party which acknowledges the importance of European cooperation but which also acknowledges the Union needs serious reform. The European Union needs more democracy because the current system isn't working. I think the most people will agree with that.
Complain about this comment
You're transitioning from what Boris' victory means for Europe to your own election prediction, without actually explaining what Boris' victory "means" for us (non-British Europeans)
Complain about this comment
Gruenebaum1 writes: "Only PR can exclude clowns like Johnson who owe their "success" to the media hype only."
So were 53% of London voters, over 1 million people, were duped by 'media hype'?
Hmmm.... I guess that true democracy remains a mystery to EUrophiles, especially when the results of popular votes don't match their expectations of what the outcome should be (The sneaky adoption of the 'Lisbon Treaty' which totally disregarded French and Dutch rejection of the 'Constitutional Treaty' is a good example). I know that democracy is a relatively new and fragile plant in most continental countries, but this is ridiculous.
Gruenebaum1 adds: "Because the Brits have been a constant pain in the neck, without contributing much." Apart, that is, from our cash - which despite the 'rebate' remains the 2nd or 3rd largest contribution to EU coffers.
BTW, it's an interesting fact that Luxembourg - a pygmy country (or Duchy) of 480,000 - roughly the size of Edinburgh or Dresden - and ranked by the World Bank as having the world's highest GDP (PPP), is a nett recipient of EU funds.
Gruenebaum1 concludes: "What's the point of having the UK as an EU-Partner when it is run by people who just won't accept foreigners as equals?"
This is complete tosh! The UK - and its governments past and present - accept all people as equal, including the many millions of 'foreigners' who have come to this country to live and work to mutual benefit (which also included the Sainted Boris's Turkish grandfather).
As a state, however, it is absolutely correct that the UK should place the interests of its own citizens first and foremost in all its considerations. It is precisely the failing of recent governments do this that angers all right-thinking British citizens.
I find it awkward that I need to remind someone with a surname such as yours that, as recent history shows, the rejection of, and discrimination against 'foreigners' is very much a continental trait.
Complain about this comment
Being an ex-pat who lives abroad, and who was not pro-Euro (more on this later) until arriving here I can tell you the battle of Britain with the EU is almost pointless. I have lived in three EU countries now, and travel to about another batch every year so have visited most by now. Not one country I have been in wants a single EU super state, indeed they are all very proud nations who will quite happily stick the boot into their neighbours. But unlike us British it's for fun, and when practicality kicks in the countries stick up for their own interests. In my life time I don´t think we will see an EU superstate, nobody wants it. Moreover the constitution was attempt to rid the EU of much overbloated sense of paperwork and replace it with a more streamlined system, while for the most part strengthening the rights of EU member states. It was NOT about reducing the idea of the nation state. Despite whatever spin the Daily Mail etc put on it.
While the countries here are very proud of their own heritage they realise that the benefits of EU membership outweigh the disadvantages -even those that like the UK pay in more than they get out. Also without realising it the EU human rights court is probably the average Brits only recourse to civilisation as the nanny state and invasion of privacy aspects of New Labour kick in. Hence without that your protection from many ills disguised as counter terrorism would disappear. Furthermore for people like me it allows us to live and work abroad without any problem, otherwise I would most likely have had a worse job or worse still been unemployed back in the UK - thus ending up on the list of the many pet hates that the Daily Mail (and Middle England) seem to take delight in hating.
The notion that a coin (the Euro) some how shapes your countries identity is frankly rubbish, for most here it was about practicality and lowering costs. As no more do you need to pay 3% on every transaction, or a fee to some currency exchange or bank. Also it avoids the need to carry multiple currencies. That is not to say it is right for everyone, when it comes to the UK I don't think it is really a good idea, it serves no purpose as we are landlocked so can hardly pop across in 5 minutes to the next country. The only thing it may make is your holiday in Europe cheaper, or at least easier to price, or rid exporters from the huge profits the banks make by changing cash.
In the end the EU is not about creating one superstate, contrary to what you might believe. But is about letting you holiday, work or study with a degree of protection in any member state. So in reality most of the UK is fighting a battle with Europe which is not even happening...
Complain about this comment
Undiplomatic: I am not sure where to begin with your post, but did you really mean to say the UK is landlocked? ;-) Also the European Convention on Human Rights has nothing to do with the EU.
The EU is absolutely about creating a super-state and has been from the beginning. What do you think Monnet’s “Action Committee for a United States of Europe” had in mind?
http://www.ena.lu/meeting_action_committee_united_states_europe_pathe_18_january_1956-022500127.html
Giscard d'Estaing, the man most responsible for the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty said the following, which I think has a message for you: "Our constitution cannot be reduced to a mere treaty for co-operation between governments. Anyone who has not yet grasped this fact deserves to wear the dunces cap."
Gruenebaum1: Borris Johnson was elected under a PR system. And please be assured we in the UK recognise you as equals who fully deserve the representative government that only exists with a nation-state just as much as we do.
Complain about this comment
Gruenebaum1 said "What's the point of having the UK as an EU-Partner when it is run by people who just won't accept foreigners as equals?"
I forgot to remind you that when the 10 new member states joined a few years back, it was only the UK, Ireland and Sweden who accepted them as 'equals' by allowing them to work in our countries.
Complain about this comment
Hmmm. A Bank Holiday blog...
Complain about this comment
"What's the point of having the UK as an EU-Partner when it is run by people who just won't accept foreigners as equals?" - Gruenebaum1
Where are the smilies?, because that comment, in the context of various EU countries signing treaties then putting in place one law or another which goes against what they've agreed, certainly deserves at least a room full of smilies rolling about laughing out loud...
Complain about this comment
The question is not whether one should be 'pro' or 'contra' Europe, but what kind of Europe we actually want.
Personally, I would prefer a very loose union based on free trade.
I don't know what kind of Europe David Cameron prefers. However, if and when he moves into Downing Street, his options will be severely limited by the fact that the Lisbon treaty will have been ratified and that the UK is just one of 27 EU member states.
The best option might be to exit the EU and to negotiate a similar position as Norway, Iceland and Switzerland: free trade without the stranglehold Brussels currently holds over European states.
Sure, Britain would have to copy lots of technical legislation to remain in tune with the EU anyway, such as about the maximum curve of cucumbers, but you would at least be free to ignore the worst nonsense.
Complain about this comment
Freeborn-John,
'The EU is absolutely about creating a super-state and has been from the beginning. What do you think Monnet's Action Committee for a United States of Europe? had in mind?'
The European Union was created in 1992 to:
- Secure European political interests worldwide.
- Prevent the newborn German giant (81 million inhabitants 1992) to dominate the European Comminity.
As far as I know European federalists are a very small minority. I think most people prefer a (loose)Confederation.
Complain about this comment
All you Brits who claim you're so righteous and dont discriminate made me think...and you're right..your laws might offer great equality to everyone..but thats not what we're talking about. The issue with many of you is that you maintain and cherish ridiculous stereotypes of all continental Europeans and use them to distinguish Man from beasts. Examples include(but are not limited to): Germans are technical brutalos who have no sense of humour, French are smelly and hate the English, Italians are all mafiosi and all their footballes do is dive etc... Unless you get rid of these outdated stereotypes and off your horse there is nothing really much we can do to improve the situation. I can understand that many American think this way, but thats because they dont know any better and because they live further away. You my dear Britons are part of Europe and have no excuse.
Complain about this comment
A propos Bertuli
The rest of Europe doesn't depend on what Britain thinks . So our attempts to influence the union are met with indifference.
Strangely - in the case of international action - the USA ignores what Britain thinks ( Iraq etc.) regardless of our 'special relationship' .
So here we are - stuck in the middle - which way to jump ?.
Should we pick a failing,debt-ridden militaristic so-called ally or a rising, multi-ethnic tolerant neighbour?.
That really is a tough one!.
Complain about this comment
DutchNemo(28): The treaties on European Union do not refer to any of the goals you talk about. They do refer to "ever closer union" and describe institutional arrangements whereby the laws of national parliaments are slowly being replaced by superior EU law imposed through qualified majority voting on nations against the will of their elected governments and which cannot be changed no matter how we vote in the future. These are the means by which the super-state is being constructed and the Lisbon treaty extends these mechanisms into new areas of policy.
Confederation is as unacceptable as federation because the difference between those two forms of governance (that the member states of a confederation retain a right to be recognised as an independent entity in international law) is in practice nominal. The member states of the EU are compelled to obey the rules of the common government in Brussels and are only independent to the extent that they may leave the EU. I do not accept your assertion that most people in Britain prefer such confederation to the nation-state + free trade.
You say that the number of European federalists is very small. That is certainly true of the population at large, but it is not true of Continental politicians who see the EU as a way to increase their personal power and exercise it at arms length from the democratic process. The common government in Brussels has been created (as per Monnet's plan) starting from the EEC and proceeding from 1992 through a series of treaties on European Union that are all without democratic legitimacy in this country. Every one of these treaties would have been defeated if put forward for approval by the British electorate. The entire political construct in Brussels is therefore illegitimate and the time has come for an incoming conservative government to renegotiate our EU membership back to one of trade.
--------------
"The Constitution is the capstone of a European Federal State." — Guy Verhofstadt, Belgian Prime Minister, Financial Times, 21st June 2004.
"Our constitution cannot be reduced to a mere treaty for co-operation between governments. Anyone who has not yet grasped this fact deserves to wear the dunce's cap. " — Valéry Giscard D'Estaing, President of the EU Convention, 29th May 2003.
"This Constitution is, in spite of all justified calls for further regulations, a milestone. Yes, it is more than that. The EU Constitution is the birth certificate of the United States of Europe. The Constitution is not the end point of integration, but the framework for - as it says in the preamble - an ever closer union." — Hans Martin Bury, the German Minister for Europe, debate in the Bundestag, Die Welt, 25 February 2005.
"The European Constitution will be an essential stage in the historic process of European integration." — Gerhard Schröder the Chancellor of Germany and President Chirac of France, The Nantes Franco-German summit joint declaration, 24th November 2001.
"We have to give ourselves a constitution which marks the birth of Europe as a political entity." — Romano Prodi, President of the European Commission, Brussels, February 2002.
"Creating a single European state bound by one European Constitution is the decisive task of our time." — German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, Daily Telegraph, 27 December 1998.
"Our task is nothing less than the creation of a new constitutional order for a new united Europe." — Peter Hain, MP, Financial Times, 22 March 2003.
"The European Union is a state under construction." — Elmar Brok, Chairman of the European Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Complain about this comment
I lived in the UK for 3 years and love the people and the country. I always hoped that the UK people would embrace the EU the same way as most other countries do, but I concluded over the last years that a Norway type relationship would be a win-win for the UK and the EU: the UK people wouldn't have to be afraid of interference anymore, and with a Norway type relationship, the EU could move on, not to create a superstate -as some other members have indicated, no single country wants that, I'm really afraid that it's a myth created by interset groups in the UK-.
The Lisbon treaty -if approved- will be a blessing for Cameron, as it will make it possible to get out of the EU, something that's currently not possible. Now, considering what Norway and Switserland pay, I'd suspect that such alliance still may cost the UK in the range of 10 billion Euro's a year.
Complain about this comment
Well, as a Labour vater there is one glint of light on the horizon: when London descends into chaos under Boris, the Tories will have handed Labour a loaded gun, they will simply have to point to the inevitable disaster and ask the electorate to think what such a party will do if handed the keys of the Country.
Complain about this comment
Gheryando @29, you are too sensitive. 'National stereotypes' are a joke. (You know: someone says something that another person consider amusing and as a result emits sounds like 'ha ha ha' or 'ho hoh ho').
Example:
Heaven is a place where the police are English; the chefs are Italian; the car mechanics are German; the lovers are French and it's all organized by the Swiss.
Hell is a place where the police are German; the chefs are English; the car mechanics are French; the lovers are Swiss and it's all organized by the Italians.
Here in the UK we have lots of these jokes about our constituent nationalities. They usually start like this: "An Englishman, a Scotsman, a Welshman and an Irishman...... "
Maybe you, like many continentals, lack two important qualities: humour and irony ;-)
Complain about this comment
Cliffleach01 @31, The Tories have already handed Nu Labour a 'loaded gun' in the form of the recent local election results.
Brown just needs to put it to his thick temple and pull the trigger. (And lots of Nu Labour MPs are offering to help him on his way).
Complain about this comment
Mark Mardell says that "anyway New Labour is further to the right (whatever that means these days) than many alleged parties of the right in Europe."
It is true that Labour is to the right of many European "right-wing" parties on economic issues: that is due partly to the collapse of the British way to socialism, and partly to Margaret Thatcher having done most of the hard work: New Labour has just been coasting.
On the other hand, it could be argued that on the issue of multiculturalism, the Conservative Party is to the left of many alleged parties of the left in Europe.
Complain about this comment
The EU is a lost cause now in the UK it just cant be sold to the British.End of the day even pro EU fans kow this to be the truth.Gordon Browns election election results are proof of this.Down with the EU free the UK
Complain about this comment
"However, if a citizen chooses *NOT* to vote, then he can't complain that the wrong person was voted into office !! If he disagreed so strongly with the candidate, then he should have exercised his vote against him !! :-)"
No, no, no!
I am sick and tired of hearing this argument being trotted out. Saying that you are not allowed to have an opinion because you failed to support any of the candidates is every bit as bad as forcing someone to vote.
Say I am given three candidates to choose from - A, B and C. A is a liar, B is a junkie, C eats babies and A wins the election. By your reasoning, I have no right to point out that A is a liar because I refused to vote for a junkie or a baby-eater.
I don't know how things work on your planet, but around here, casting a vote is supposed to be a positive affirmation of your support for a candidate. However, if we had a "none of the above" box on the ballot then you would be able to vote against someone without being forced to give support to a candidate you don't approve of.
Complain about this comment
No matter what the Conservatives say in the next year, the 2009 elections to the EU parliament are not going to be good for them. The previous leader of the Conservatives in Brussels, Mr. Timothy Kirkhope MEP, succeeded in rigging the Conservative party selection process to protect the worst of incumbent Tory MEPs from de-selection. Party members have however voted to place EU-sceptic MEPs are at the head of the party list in 2009. This gives voters that are unhappy with the EU the opportunity to vote for real EU-sceptic parties (e.g. UKIP) in the 2009 election and prune the ranks of Conservative MEPs of the worst of their federalist fellow-travellers.
The Tories like to portray Gordon Brown as a ditherer, but more than 2-years after assuming office David Cameron has failed to deliver on the one promise he made during his campaign for Tory leadership. If he cannot implement a simple promise to pull his MEPs out of the federalist EPP then it is mere wishful thinking to believe he will deliver on his hints not to let matters rest regarding the Lisbon treaty.
Complain about this comment
As nobody ever thought that is Britiain too different to the rest of the EU and needs to go her own seperate way in life.The british will always deem people who dont speak english as there first language as outsiders and the EU wants us all to be seen on the same level hmm I can see this happening. ere.Dont get me wrong i am not anti european i have many overseas friends from the EU and they feel that democracy as died in frnace and germany and its being forced on them like brown as done ere.Browns downfall the EU and refusing the public a say has pointed him to the exit of number 10
Complain about this comment
There's no doubt some pretty serious economic factors - food or fuel price rises, and tax issues - loomed large in these election results.
Those factors alone could easily explain Labour getting a hammering.
But I'm wondering why the Lib Dems also had a pretty poor result.
Despite Labour's woes, and despite the party having recently elected a new leader, the Lib Dems' stalled - only gaining 33 new councillors and losing share of the vote.
That Labour did so badly the Lib Dems edged up into 2nd place is neither here nor there.
My conclusion is that it would be a mistake to rule out as a major factor in these results the recent betrayal by both those parties of their popular election promises of a referendum on the EU Constitution treaty.
The overwhelming majority of people wanted that referendum, and the arguments used to slide out of promises given were so threadbare it should have been embarrassing.
Their actions over the treaty made both Labour and the Lib Dems look shifty and untrustworthy. And that's never going to make for good election results.
While together they may have succeeded in pushing the treaty through the Commons, both parties should perhaps reflect on whether these results show they haven't in fact, yet, got away with that referendum betrayal.
Complain about this comment
The biggest problem with the EU is that it does not have the consent of the public.All member countries have been tricked into this maddness of a union
Complain about this comment
@ScepticMax: Hahaha..maybe you have a small point
@jaws1912: the EU has MY consent and most of the EUropeans I know favour it as well. Statements like: All member countries have been tricked into this madness...fail to carry much weight...
Complain about this comment
Freeborn-John,
'An incoming conservative government to renegotiate our EU membership back to one of trade.'
Renegotiating British EU membership will probably (and unfortunatly) mean the UK will have to leave. European political and economical cooperation is necessary if we want to survive in this globelising world. We should change the way we cooperate. The current system isn't working and needs serious reform. We need more democracy. As far as I know serious opposition in the European Parliament is nonexistent (excuding a few nationalists). We need a Pan-European political party which acknowledges the importance of the European Union but also acknowledges the current system isn't working and should be reformed as soon as possible. Most people agree the EU should never become the USE. Our politicians have to respect that wish.
'I do not accept your assertion that most people in Britain prefer such confederation to the nation-state + free trade.'
We already are a (loose) confederation. European cooperation shouldn't be extended much further. Cooperation is necessary at the following subjects:
- Economy (Euro optional)
- Education
- Combatting Climate Change
- Energy
- Combatting Illigal immigration
I think most people will agree cooperation on these subjects is necessary.
A European Army is optional but personally I'm against it because NATO is responsible for the defence of Europe. A European Army would probably very ineffective and so a waste of money.
Complain about this comment
I think ignace2 (32) makes one of th most sensible arguments I've read for a long time on Mark's blogs. Cameron needs to visit Norway.
So, britons, accept the Lisbon Treaty - then get out!
Complain about this comment
Frenchderek (45): It is not necessary to ratify the Lisbon treaty to leave the EU. But once ratified it would be necessary to follow its procedure when leaving.
DutchNemo: How do you imagine the rest of the world survives globalisation when they are not in the EU? Has it occurred to you that Switzerland, Norway, Singapore, etc are all doing just fine outside the EU without sacrificing their democracy?
I agree with you that the EU is already a loose confederation, but I do not agree that a majority of Britons has ever existed, or ever will exist, that would agree to be ruled by such a confederation. The 1975 vote was for a common market and not the common government that has since been created by undemocratic means.
The list of areas where you would like to see the EU having decision-making power is totally inappropriate for an international body. Education in particular is a completely inappropriate policy area for a body that is desperate to engage in social-engineering on a grand scale to turn our children into compliant citizens of the super-state. Democratic legitimacy at the international level requires consensus such that the political preferences we express in national elections (where there is a polity) are not over-ruled. The EU, uniquely among international organisations, has abandoned consensus (and with it democratic legitimacy) replacing it by the coercion of qualified majority voting.
There can be no pan-European democracy when the different peoples of Europe do not regard themselves as a single polity that agrees to live under majority decisions of EU institutions which they as a nation disagree with. Pan-European political parties do not make sense when there is no pan-European polity. They would in fact be nothing more than power cartels whereby politicians whose democratic legitimacy only exists within the one country where they were elected get to run each another’s countries against the wishes of the electorates of those other countries. The EU Council of Ministers is already such a power cartel (which is why they do not respect our wishes now).
The only EU reform compatible with democracy is the return of decision-making powers in politically-sensitive areas to the democratic political institutions of the nation-state. If this cannot be negotiated then the UK must leave the EU. The EU is increasingly obsolete anyway as even a regional common market in the globalised world when so many goods are traded between continents and most economic activity is now in the tariff-free service sector.
Complain about this comment
Dear British,
You should make up your mind, so visit Norway or make your referendum now!
It's true the common critic to the EU over her lack of democratic representativity.
But it is your obstructive attitude what makes EU stuck without necessary reforms: that's it, introducing a more efficient and democratic system.
So if you get in, you are more than welcome! If not, good-bye and good luck!
Complain about this comment
"Moreover the constitution was attempt to rid the EU of much overbloated sense of paperwork and replace it with a more streamlined system" - undiplomatic
Wouldn't it be better to ensure that treaties previously signed are actually upheld before putting name to paper on yet another document?
"they are all very proud nations who will quite happily stick the boot into their neighbours. But unlike us British it's for fun, and when practicality kicks in the countries stick up for their own interests"
Hmm, I think some people in the UK might find it hard to reconcile the "sticking the boot in", "it's just a bit of a laugh", and the "think of yourself" bit, e.g. create laws which go against the deal you've just made, a bit confusing...or are you suggesting the UK becomes more European?
"without realising it the EU human rights court is probably the average Brits only recourse to civilisation"
The average Brits recourse on human rights issues these days is to a UK court, since the UK is the only country (as far as I know) to implement the ECHR as national law. An EU citizen in any other country, unfortunately, has to wait possibly 5 years and stump up circa £100k if they find said country in which they live breaches that or any other supposed EU law, as too often happens.
"All you Brits who claim you're so righteous and dont discriminate made me think...your laws might offer great equality to everyone..but thats not what we're talking about. The issue is...that you maintain and cherish ridiculous stereotypes of all continental Europeans...Unless you get rid of these outdated stereotypes and off your horse there is nothing really much we can do to improve the situation" - Gheryando
Smilies, where are they when you need them?
"We need a Pan-European political party" - DutchNemo
Can such a thing ever exist in our lifetimes?
Complain about this comment
Freeborn-John,
'Has it occurred to you that Switzerland, Norway, Singapore, etc are all doing just fine outside the EU without sacrificing their democracy?'
True, but these nations depend on nearby Great Powers. Switzerland and Norway depend on the European Union in foreign affairs and Singapore depends on China. The UK is powerfull enough to secure her interests worldwide. One of the reasons the UK signed the Maastricht Treaty was that she wanted to be a part of the decission making process which would determine the future of our continent.
'Education in particular is a completely inappropriate policy area for a body that is desperate to engage in social-engineering on a grand scale to turn our children into compliant citizens of the super-state.'
I meant to say we should cooperate on education. Exchange programmes between schools for example. In my opinion this would benefit our childeren an teach them some mutual understanding about each other. I don't agree with you the European Union wants to 'brainwash' our childeren to turn them into citizens of a super state. The people of Europe don't want a United States of Europe just like many politicians (with a few exeptions of course).
'Pan-European political parties do not make sense when there is no pan-European polity.'
True, but I think the most Europeans agree we need to cooperate and that we need more democracy in the European Union. That's, in my opinion, enough common ground to start a new political party.
When the British people desire a referendum about EU membership then Gordon Brown should give them the desired referendum. I would like the UK to stay a part of the EU because I believe the people of Europe are capable of reforming the European Union, we can transform her in a good functioning democracy.
Complain about this comment
after reading dutch nemo point on this matter i must say the EU having a say on eduction is a big no no .Just think of the brain washing they could do to such gulable young minds
Complain about this comment
MichaelBXL,
'Can such a thing ever exist in our lifetimes?'
Yes, such a thing can exist in our lifetimes. When several people from different European nations agree on: European integration, economy ect. then they've enough commong ground to start a new political party. Such a political party is, in my opnion, a Pan-European political party. Such a party can be Europskeptic, Pro-European and everything between these two visions about the European Union.
Complain about this comment
DutchNemo (48): Nations can co-operate without the coercive political institutions in Brussels, as happens throughout the rest of the world. Voluntary co-operation does not involve being outvoted in the EU Council of Ministers and compelled to do things you do not want.
Betuli (47): The lack of EU democracy derives from the linguistic, cultural and historic differences between the peoples of Europe that lie at the heart of our strong national identities. The problem cannot therefore be solved by institutional reform. You could take institutional arrangements of the highest democratic credentials - such as those of the USA for example - and apply them to the EU and the result would not be democratic at all because no European nation will accept being outvoted and compelled to live under law they disagree with simply because there are people in other countries who would like them to. That is the different between a federal nation-state and a multinational federation. Democracy requires a united people of sufficient solidarity that they will agree to be bound by majorities... and the EU does not have one.
Complain about this comment
UK should leave the EU and go the Norway route by signing the EEA treaty basically that means:
- UK would still be part of the European market
- UK will stay have to pay the EU money (and yet get nothing in return)
- UK will still have to adopt the EU laws.
- Even though the UK will be adopting the EU laws they will have no say what so ever regarding any of the decision making nor the laws.
So its a win-win scenario for... well certainly not UK but EU.
I'm surprised countries managed to sign that silly treaty (yeh I'm looking at you Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and of course, virtual member Switzerland) and I'm even more shocked that there are supporters of this approach in the UK.
But you know what I'd love it if the UK went for this approach, just for the irony of it. :)
---------------------
As for the United States of Europe I for one support it (along with any other super states) Of course I hope we will go for a better name United States of Europe sounds lame as does the EU. Perhaps just Europe will do fine.
Complain about this comment
Freeborn-John,
'Nations can co-operate without the coercive political institutions in Brussels, as happens throughout the rest of the world.'
There isn't a group nations in this world which works more closely together then the nations of the European Union. Organisations like NAFTA, ASEAN and APEC are not even close to that level of cooperation. As I said before: 'the coercive political institutions in Brussels' can be reformed. I can't believe it's impossible to reform the Union. The European Union is one of the most succesfull confederations in world history. It's fantastic to see nations who were once enemies to cooperate after so many centuries of war (with some help of NATO of course). We were able to defeat the ghosts of the past so I think we're able to reform the Union to.
Complain about this comment
@Freeborn-John,
there's currently no orderly way to get out of the EU. With the Lisbon treaty that will be possible. But more fundamentally, you should not prescribe to other nations what they should be doing, just like other nations should not prescibe to the UK what's right for the UK. If the UK just wants the economic cooperation, that's UK's democratic choice, and there's a model to do that, i.e. Norway, Switserland. What you're trying to do however is to impose that model to all EU nations. Please leave it up to each member to decide if they want the Norway model or the fuller integration model. Some countries have chosen for Schengen, the Euro, social policies. Live of everybody would be much simpler and lots of frustration would be avoided if the UK would make the deliberate decison for the economic cooperation model instead creating opt-outs and exceptions that anyway lead to the same result. And if some other countries want that model as wel, that's their choice.
Complain about this comment
Freeborn-John,
I don't know at this stage which would be the best structure for a united Europe, considering EU nations have strong national identities.
Probably the most sensible choice would be a confederation, with enough self-government for any current state, and sharing a strong elected government in Brussels or anywhere else.
Immigration, terrorism, international crime, unemployment or social security are challenges we have to face united, if we want to improve our way of life.
I don't want to open the debate about the Euro. Another time. However, I cannot see how being outside the Schengen treaty helps UK. Unfortunaltely, facts have shown its failure.
Complain about this comment
Actually Mark, not to be padantic, the U.K. is in Europe - so what part of Europe is trembling. Certainly not here in Spain. We have problems of our own such as a water shortage and too many unsold houses.
To be quite serious for a minute, what this elections shows is how little real choice the British public have with the two main Parties having more or less identical policies.
I see our system of Preportional Representation and devolved Regional Government, establish by Referendum 30 years ago, as being far more democratic the the British 'first past the post winner takes all' centralized system.
Unlike Britain, Norway has waste naural resources and a small population. In order to trade on even terms with the E.U. they have to comply with all the E.U. market regulations without having a voice in what they will be. Switzerland has a special Department that ensures that all proposed Swiss legislation is not in conflict with E.U. Law.
A final point, would it not have been politically exspenient for Prime Minister Brown to allow a Referendum, he is cetainly no friend of the E.U. Perhaps he looked at the true cost of withdrawl and it frightened him.
Complain about this comment
DutchNemo (54): There is no reason to believe the EU can be satisfactorily reformed. All experience indicates the only reform on offer is that leading further towards an undemocratic super-state.
Ticape (53): The Swiss government has produced a report ("Europe 2006", see links below) comparing the costs and consequences of (i) Switzerland joining the EEA, (ii) joining the EU or (iii) continuing their existing bilateral relationship with the EU as part of EFTA. Their official conclusion is very different from your assertion that EEA membership means accepting all EU laws and paying as much as EU members. The Swiss are only required to accept a tiny fraction of EU law in areas of low political sensitivity and they calculate being an EU member would cost 9 times as much as now.
“Europe 2006” report in German
http://www.europa.admin.ch/dokumentation/00437/00460/00684/index.html?lang=de
“Europe 2006” report in French
http://www.europa.admin.ch/dokumentation/00437/00460/00684/index.html?lang=fr
P.S. The UK has already signed the EEA treaty and would (if it wished) remain an EEA member even after leaving the EU. The purpose of any renegotiation of our EU membership should of course to be to negotiate something better than this, for example voting rights on single market legislation while being free from all aspects of political union. I think that if an incoming Conservative government were to achieve that, or to negotiate something similar to the Swiss-EU bilateral treaties, and promise to use the savings on our direct contribution to the EU budget to cut Council Tax by ¼ there would be an overwhelming majority in Britain that would support such a result.
Complain about this comment
Amazing, what a lot of tosh is being spoken about Boris, he's replaced a corrupt Socialist who should have been kicked years ago as he's been playing his games since the 60's when he started out in Norwood. It should also be remembered that in the London elections proportional representation was used and that to win Boris had firstly to defeat the dirty tricks employed by Nu-Labour and dear old Ken eg, postal votes for imaginary people from multi occupancy bedsits, voters have to vote for a second choice or their vote is disqualified, boundary changes favouring Labour, etc etc. It's just a shame that those deriding him and praising the European PR system have as always decided to ignore the rampant corruption that has infected most EU countries and which continues to create misery for everybody living and paying exorbitant taxes in the EU.
Complain about this comment
Sigh! If only the europhobes knew anything about "Brussels".
98% of the comments of europhobes miss the point. I routinely ask Brits three questions before I engage with them in a conversation about "Europe":
Do you speak a foreign language?
Have you lived abroad?
Have you ever been to Brussels?
Two "nos" to these questions mean that it's just not worth the effort.
Don't get me wrong: Other Europeans can be just as ignorant. But few would display the same bizarre sense of superiority and selective perception (for the latter Buzet23 (#59) provides a perfect example. Which country recently stalled a policy investigation into massive corruption by an arms manufacturer?)
Complain about this comment
Dear Gruenebaum1 #60, I think your question should have been which European arms manufacturer has not been helped by their government and has not been involved in corruption/bribe scandals at any time, I can't quite think of one I'm afraid as certainly UK, France, Belgium, Italy and maybe others have had their share of scandals, cover ups etc.
By the way the answer to your three questions is yes to all three as I worked in Brussels for many years and have lived in Belgium for seventeen years which is where I have confirmed my opinion as to the failings inherent in the system of proportional representation for elections. It is a major flaw that you cannot register a null vote as even blank papers will be reallocated. Just as in the London election where you were obliged to enter a second choice even if you didn't like anyone else, so in my local municipal, regional or government elections I have to make a vote even if I don't like any of the candidates. It has had the effect of causing the Front Nationale party to gain over 6% in Wallonie and 11% in my own commune as people search for a means of registering their dissatisfaction.
Complain about this comment
Gruenebaum1 (60): It seems to me that if you were as well-informed about the EU as you imagine then you might be able to do a bit better than merely insulting those who disagree with you?
Have you considered trying some rationale argument for a change, (perhaps starting with the points I made in post 52)?
Complain about this comment
@Buzet23:
using Belgium as the reason why you think proportional representation failed is rather disingenious I believe as Belgium, at least the federal government, has rather special system. One that you don't encounter in many other countries, if at all.
After all, there aren't many federal countries with only dominant groups and where the federal government has to be made up via a coalition that not only spans both peoples but also across parties.
that said, when you vote you can make sure your vote is worthless. just scribble on the paper, make a drawing on it or fill it in incorrectly. In other words: make an invalid vote (which is different from a blank vote). Even so, there aren't many people in Belgium that would give up the system of proportional representation
Complain about this comment
"Sigh! If only the europhobes knew anything about Brussels"
Indeed, if all those Daily Mail, Sun, Telegraph readers knew some of the things which go on in other EU countries, they might become even more Eurosceptic than they are now.
Certainly it's a good thing they don't spend their time reading eur-lex instead, and that they seem to have (quite sensibly) removed some of the reports about various countries interpretaions of 'right of free movement and residence', 'freedom of establishment' from the europa.eu website.
On a more serious note, the only thing which makes sigh these days, as a former Europhile, is that so many Europeans when told about such things come up with reasons to justify them.
Three questions? in my case it's 1) yes, 2) yes, a number of countries, a number of passports, 3) yes, and a warehouse full of t-shirts.
Gruenebaum1, as you might have noticed by now, when I read some of your posts the first thing which comes to mind is where is the smiley button, particularly the ROFLOL one.
PS:
Mark, why is the sign in etc to post comments not secure (https/ssl)? Surely in some countries this will create problems for people?
PPS:
"I believe...Belgium, at least the federal government, has [a] rather special system. One that you don't encounter in many other countries, if at all." One which discriminates against one of the largest parties? :-)
Complain about this comment
By the way: I'm strongly in favor UK joins the Euro.
But it's merely from a selfish point of view: I'm working in UK and don't want to lose money any time I visit my country which is, by coincidence, the main destination in the world for British expats... Guess which one.
Complain about this comment
betuli (65): Strewth mate. I didn't know they used the Euro in Australia...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/brits_abroad/html/default.stm
Complain about this comment
Sorry, Freeborn-John, you're right.
I meant Europe, not the world. Or the second destination in the world, not the first.
I'm sure my original source was wrong, since I trust BBC solvency.
Pls don't make an easy joke over my confusion. Cheers...
Complain about this comment
No worries ;-)
Complain about this comment
Gruenebaum1 @60.
1. I speak more than one foreign language.
2. I have lived abroad for more than a third of my life.
3. I know Brussels very well and like the city very much (especially the local food and architecture).
Some additional facts:
A. I love Europe - its peoples, cultures and lifestyles (The EU is not Europe).
B. I have travelled and/or worked in most European countries and enjoy their diversity.
C. I am not a EUrophobe - I don't have a fear fear (rational or irrational) of the EU...
But I do loathe the EU as it currently is - an overbearing, over-bloated, collectivist, nascent super-state.
What we EUrosceptics really want is our independence and self-determination. This is an anathema to proponents of the European Project's prime objective of 'ever closer union'.
Complain about this comment
The EU may be an overbearing, over-bloated, collectivist, nascent super-state. But this seems a Byzantine discussion: what's first the egg or the hen?
If the EU could finally implement the necessary reforms in order to get more representativity and efficiency, it woudn't be the overweight state you described.
So maybe you bet for the hen, and I do it for the egg.
Complain about this comment
Well said scepticmax #69, like you I have traveled widely both in the EU and the world, the current implementation of the EU is abhorrent to almost everybody I know in countries throughout the EU and world. There are many here in Wallon who think it has become the reinvention of the USSR and many former Eastern residents who suffered under the USSR have said that to me or people I know.
To BernardVC #63, it has always been my understanding that even if you spoil your vote it is still counted, I will ask my local Mayor about that just to be sure but many here have said that they are angry that they can't register a protest vote. When it comes to the proportional system I was in frequent contact with the electoral reform society in the 70's, and I never thought it provided a balanced, effective result even then. The federal system does exist in other countries though, Germany for one, although they fortunately have the advantage of only one language which has helped reduce many of the West/East problems unlike the North/South disaster that exists in Belgium. It is a shame that the 'special' Federal system of Belgium and it's allocation of finances is driven more by historic envy, jealousy, and often hatred than by a genuine desire to keep the country together.
Complain about this comment
How sad to see our friends on the continent referring to the "English" when meaning the "British". However it's understandable as the smaller members of the union are completely dominated by the self interest of those who are "English"
Why should this large block of people who are truly in the European Union care about what happens to the carping population of the island off Belgium. After all the UK makes no positive contributions to the advancement of the greatest political venture ever attempted.
I am the first generation of my family not forced to fight in a European war and I hope for the same for my children. Will the little Englanders deny this to me and my family?
Complain about this comment
Mallorquin (72): Did the unification of Germany in the 19th century (on which the EU is modelled) stop wars or make them worse?
Given that no two democracies ever went to war with one another, does the slow coup against democracy that the EU entails make conflict more or less likely?
Complain about this comment
given that all politicians of the EU are elected, either directly (EP, council of ministers) or indirectly (Commission) saying that there's a slow coup against democracy on the EU-level is rather laughable.
It's like claiming the american presidential elections are undemocratic because the people elect not the president but a college of electors, who then elect the president.
Complain about this comment
BernardVC (74): Some points:
1. The “chain of delegation” is very, very long in the EU and means that no voter in Europe can hope to influence Commission proposals. We elect an MP. The MPs of the majority party form a cabinet government. The government appoints one of the 27 Commissioners who swears to be independent of his national government. The Commission has the monopoly right to proposes EU legislation and the other EU institutions may only modify this proposal under unlikely circumstances. The result is that no voter in any European country can hope to influence the process leaving the Commission with enormous power to set the EU legislative agenda.
2. Your analogy with the US is rather meaningless because the US president cannot initiate legislation (this being a power of US Congressmen who are directly elected).
3. Democracy is more than elections. The principle that the majority decides is not accepted at international level, or the Chinese and Indians would rule the world. Democracy based on the majority principle is impossible in Europe because we do not accept to be bound by decisions simply because there are people in other EU member states that would like us to.
No political party runs for office anywhere in Europe making manifesto commitments as to what they will do at EU level. So we cannot vote for or against any measures taken an EU level. It would be pointless for one national party to do this anyway when they send only 1 Commissioner to Brussels and have no idea what he will be doing there (this being up to the Commission president). Elections to the EU Parliament are also not fought on manifesto commitments. Again it would be useless for MEPs do this because they are not allowed to propose EU legislation. So why do you think it "laugahable" when i say this system is not democrtic? Can you tell me when you voted for any action ever taken by the EU? Even referendums on tranferring more powers to this system are now ignored or cancelled.
This system will not be reformed. The UK must re-negotiate our membership to return political powers to Westminster if we are to restore our democracy. This should be the decisive task of the next Conservative government.
Complain about this comment
Why should this be considered at all newsworthy in other countries - why should people in Azerbaijan have an opinion on who the new mayor of London is? I couldn't name the mayor of Baku ...
Complain about this comment
"There are many here in Wallon who think it [EU] has become the reinvention of the USSR and many former Eastern residents who suffered under the USSR have said that to me or people I know." [#71]
To be honest, EU is not quite there [USSR] yet, but not for the lack of trying, but rather for the lack of enforcement apparatus.
Too bad that unelected Politbureau in Brussels doesn't have anything like NKVD/KGB/FSB at its disposal.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS