Sleepwalking to the polls
Across this great continent of ours a slight sense of desperation hangs over the European elections: the real world isn't paying attention.
In the Czech city of Plzen campaigners hand out spices that go with feathered game on behalf of a candidate whose name translates as... Mr Game. Those who stop to listen get a cook book with recipes from the 27 EU countries and a picture of the MEP in a chef's hat.
In France, at one rally in a very plush auditorium, the audience are all but outnumbered by the candidates, who answer questions with the eager enthusiasm of an estate agent flogging a haunted house that's perched on the edge of a cliff.
One film encouraging people to vote shows a screaming woman running into a polling booth, marking her ballot paper, still screaming, and running out, screaming. A madman with a bloodstained axe then enters requesting HIS ballot paper - the slogan along the lines of what ever you're doing make sure you find time to vote. All trying to convince you these elections matter.
Of course to some of us they do... they will dominate every waking hour of my life for a month. And distressingly, probably a few of the sleeping ones as well. Some nightmares come wearing chefs' hats and rosettes. 
I am not alone of course. From the Arctic Circle to the middle of the Med there are around 9,000 candidates and they, and their mums, will be playing close attention.
But, in general, interest in the European elections seems to be regarded as a possibly harmless eccentricity, like collecting matchboxes or a tendency to wear cravats... something that says "weirdo".
This at a time when the old milk and honey aren't exactly free-flowing and politics - even international co-operation - might seem to matter.
Nicolas Benoit and Manu Garcia are deeply political animals: French unionists, supporters of the Communist Party. And they've been at the centre of the crisis. Their company Caterpillar in Grenoble is cutting the workforce nearly in half. I sought them out to hear what they thought of the elections. But they've been a bit preoccupied.
Overlooked by the snowy peaks around the city, they told me how, after weeks of fruitless negotiations, striking workers broke into the factory. They regarded it as offensive that the management had installed armed guards with dogs and they went after the bosses. Nicolas says "they jumped ship", clearly regarding this behaviour as unmanly and unsporting. "Ran away! Like Carl Lewis!" interjects Manu.
A week later they and about 100 other workers broke into the offices, caught the bosses napping and boss-napped them: offices. "There was a lot of panic with that many people," admits Nicolas, without what I imagine to be some understatement. The bosses were told they couldn't leave. Wisely they didn't try to put up a counter-revolutionary struggle and had an uncomfortable night sleeping on the floor. Twenty-four hours later, with the promise of more talks, they were allowed to go.
Nicolas tells me that they were shocked about the way the boss-napping was seen in other countries. When you are at war you have to get out your bazooka and make a lot of noise. And he says those who were outraged have no idea what it is like not to be able to feed your children.
So what do these very political people, wanting change, think about the election? Manu admits he's been too tied-up with Caterpillar to think about them at all. Nicolas says voting is always important, but the parliament is too dominated by two big groups of left and right. They are clearly not that bothered.
This week the French newspaper Liberation had a headline trying to persuade people to vote: "Europe close to you". But it doesn't feel that way to a lot of people.
There are many reasons for this. But part of it is the nature of the European Parliament itself.
When you vote, if you vote, in June you will not be choosing a government. That's true of congressional elections in the US which, mid-term, have an even lower turnout. But you will not even be choosing a parliament to stand up to a government of a clear stripe: if the EU has a government it is made up of 27 national governments and the commission, so its political complexion shifts almost constantly. When you don't really know what the government is it's difficult to say if you are voting to challenge it.
Then there's what members of the European Parliament do: change or vote down proposed laws. When I put it to a Eurosceptic lord recently that many MEPs had more power than many national ministers he airily replied: "OH, over the size of plugs, and things like that".
A lot of what they do is unglamorous, not the stuff of headlines. This is not to say the elections don't matter. At the moment the rather soft right dominates. If the Socialists were to win most seats the sort of laws coming out of the EU would have a much redder tinge.
But I suspect only when Manu, Nicolas and their friends think it worth turning their hand to MEP-napping will the parliament, and these elections, have come of age. Until then I will pick up my matchboxes, straighten my cravat and make my way to the next rally.
This is a piece I filed for today's edition of From Our Own Correspondent
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~28~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
The casual reader may note that both the billboard advertisements in the photo have distinct party brand names attached. The first is FDP, the second SDP. Now these are huge parties within domestic german politics, and they have been since the NSADP lost influence back in the mid forties.
I wonder, do british voters feel sometimes that the EU has been set up by somebody else, for somebody else?
French and German voters have a completely different understanding of these Eur elections than the average british voter. To a british voter, all the parties on offer are new, and they might stand for anything at all. You can't really tell from listening to politicians, and in any case the party organization at european level is not what it seems. The german or french voter, however, is voting for familiar parties, for familiar faces. They understand that the EU is the same as their national governments, with the curious proviso that the parliament has almost no power of the majority of government spending.
Yes, the MEP's may have some say over the size of plugs (I didn't know they did). They have no say at all in matters of agricultural subsidies, banking law or taxation and the economy (import tariffs).
The more I see of the EU in action, the more obvious it becomes to me that the facts of the party history involved tells the clear story, and that the rhetoric about the desire for an ever closer union is simply a smokescreen. This EU is a creation of the major continental european parties, for the benefit of the major european political parties. It has been designed to give the party more power, and the voter less power. That is why it is structured differently to national governments. Surely, that can be the ONLY reason. The same people who live under the national structures made the EU structure, after all.
I mean, if you knew a man and he had a red car, and then he built himself a new car, and he painted it blue.... you would be entitled to say he preferred blue to red, as a colour. That is what we have here. The EU is a political system built by professional political parties. It was built during the cold war, by socialists and catholic lords of continental europe. It marginalizes voters, and reduces the power of regional and local governments, to favour a huge central party.
There is this idea that the cold war is over, but I don't think it is quite right. The cold war might be over in Russia (or it might not), but within the EU there is still a cold war going on between the soviet system (huge centralized parties make the rules for everyone, and sleep in their beds, and hold phoney elections), and a system that allows local populations to have some degree of genuine legislative freedom within a federation.
Freance and Germany are being sold the EU as a good idea because it is sold to them, as unified nationalistic cultures, as a means of taking economic control over the whole of europe. Everyone else is along for the ride.
Complain about this comment
Mark,
Your comment "But I suspect only when Manu, Nicolas and their friends think it worth turning their hand to MEP-napping will the parliament, and these elections, have come of age." may turn out to be close to the hearts of not just communist activists but also ordinary non-activists. Maybe the day will come when UK MP's will be napped for their over claiming of expenses coupled to their total lack of regret for their actions and in most cases their refusal to appologise.
However I'm sure that the full force of the UK's police and justice system would be brought to bear on those actually doing the napping, just as whistle blowers are subject to police investigation on the dubious grounds of National Security, i.e. protecting the Labour government. I would love to see Brown, or Mandy or many of the other senior ministers held hostage for some days until they 'listen', but I think it won't happen, likewise I don't think MEP's would be any different judging by their refusal to publicise their own expenses.
Finally Mark, your last comment suggests that you are joining the ranks of us that regard the Franco-Germanic axis with deep suspicion on the grounds that it believes that only it has the god given right to control the destiny of the EU. Considering that Sarko is not too popular with the German leadership these days we'll have to see where the ride takes us, unless the next batch of snouts in the trough MEP's turn out to be not so self serving as the last lot.
Complain about this comment
"If the Socialists were to win most seats the sort of laws coming out of the EU would have a much redder tinge."
And since, these days, the EU initiates 80% of the UK's laws, this demonstrates why it is crucial to re-assert our ability - and sovereign right - to govern ourselves.
The recent plague of corrupt politics and politicians here in the UK will greatly impact the result of the Euro elections on June 4th and strengthen those parties that promise to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty (irrespective of whether ratified or not, or whether this precipitates a 'showdown' with the EU) and to reverse 'ever closer union'.
Not before time.
Complain about this comment
Ironic, is it not tat just a couple of weeks ago, EUsceptics were writing off the election as a non-event. Some were even suggesting we should stay away in droves to underline the irrelevance of it all. Suddenly British politicians are caught with their noses in the trough and these same people want us to use the poll as a big stick with which to beat the encumbants.
You are missing the point. If Europeans go out and vote in sufficient numbers for candidates who do not represent the status quo they point to fundamental change in the political thinking of the broad mass. It may very well be that Parliament itself does not have the necessary clout to change the way we are governed but ask yourself whether the Commission or the Council could afford to ignore such a powerful message. If this election had been a couple of years ago, it would have been a relatively cozy endorsement from a 'never had it so good' generation. All that has changed with the onset of recession and hardship.
The message to national governments could not be clearer. Ignore the shift in political opinion at your peril - because if you take no notice, you are next for the chop. If I was sitting in a UK party headquarters and we were roundly hammered at the EU elections, I would not be writing off the EU parliament as irrelevant. I would be a very worried person.
The election may not be a world changing event but it is an opportunity and to waste in on the alter of apathy or, still worse, protest absention would be a great mistake.
Complain about this comment
Mark, further to your argument over the reluctance of many of us in casting our vote for the next European Parliament (namely: When you vote, if you vote, in June you will not be choosing a government.), I would ask you how can you imagine the future of Europe without the EU. The present depression is deepening even more than predicted and it gives enough food to any kind of leftist movement and radical parties. How can we come to some common, relatively and temporally acceptable, optimal decision without the EC or the EP? If you are a Euro sceptic (and judging by your latest articles I have the growing concern that you really are), and being a BBC leading figure at the same time, can you share the (imaginary or rather the moral) responsibility of working against the active voting process, i.e. against the reinforcement of the EU institutions?
Complain about this comment
Well the good news is the UK Citizens seem much more energised about Elections and Democracy than they were a week or 2 ago.
Thanks to the MP Expense Claims scandal there is widespread interest amongst the British Electorate in expressing their utter disillusion with the whole body-Politic!
Congratulations Brown, Cameron, Clegg et al! My how you must be proud of your achievements!
The prospect of even lower turnouts at Council and European elections than already predicted: The slur upon UK of possible BNP, Monster Raving Looney etc. candidates getting elected on minimal Electoral support!
And for what!? For 'flipping' your 2nd Home Allowance! For having your moat drained, for large tv sets, for bags of manure.. Well, at least the last item was full of the stuff that you venal, corrupt 650 MPs so grubbily deserve to have poured over you!
I never intended to vote in the EUP Election as I believe any participation will be taken and used by the EU as justification for its undemocratic existence: At least with increased UKIP membership and the sight of the ugly backside of UK racism also in the European chamber it can only help pressure MEPs of other nations to press for a Referendum to see the back of UK/England membership.
I do not know what excuses the rest of Europe will have for failing to turnout in any significant electoral numbers for the Euro Elections, but, 2 things are sure: The lowest ever EU Election turnout will be hailed a brilliant success and conclusive evidence that the 'Federalist' agenda is on course, by Msr Barroso, and, secondly, the British Citizens will demand evermore stridently for the channel drawbridge to be drawn up as they see a European Parliament with no UK/England public mandate encroaching still further into their daily lives.
Mr Mardell you got something right about 3 sentences from the end of your Article, "..that is not to say the Elections do not matter..": With what lays ahead I think we can all agree they matter very much, and most of all, for what the failure to even "sleepwalk to the polls" will bring about in the membership seated at Council, UK and EU Parliaments by 2010.
Complain about this comment
Fair enough, we're all disenchanted with politics, so indifference sets in.
However we should bear in mind that Westminster MP's are complete beginners, when it comes to excessive parliamentary expenses.
They should have been taking lessons from their European counterparts!
On this basis we should not be "shredding" our Euro votes, but voting for a party that will retract us from Europe, at least in part, to simply being a trading collective of countries, like it was when we join the EEC.
Although I would not normally vote for UKIP, this June I will. They are the only party who are committed to getting us out of the present European set-up.
Complain about this comment
Dont believe Nicolas Benoit about sacked French workers not being able to feed their children. After just three years working in France, earning the minimum wage (1060 euros net at the time), I was entitled to unemployment pay of 860 euros net a month, for 23 months.
Those losing their jobs arent at risk of losing their homes, or being unable to feed their children. A report about a laid-off car factory worker said he could no longer afford to buy cake for his kids at the boulangerie every day, and when his car is two years old he wont be able to trade it in for a new one. Hard luck. These people think they have a job for life, they are very comfortable with the salaries and the perks, and they dont want to give it all up. There is a lot of suffering and poverty in France, but not in these highly unionized factories.
Complain about this comment
#1
"and they have been since the NSADP lost influence back in the mid forties."
That's one way of putting it!...
"I wonder, do british voters feel sometimes that the EU has been set up by somebody else, for somebody else?"
Then they only have themselves to blame, look at Poland, a (relativity) 'new member state' but does it make its self known, one might not have agreed with her politics but Thatcher also made her 'handbag' known to what is was then the EEC. The problem with the UK is that we spend far to much time complaining about what we don't have and not enough time talking with fellow Europeans to get what we want.
"This EU is a creation of the major continental european parties, for the benefit of the major european political parties."
So that would be why the minority parties, such as the Greens, the far right or the far left are making inroads, winning seats, or at least capable of being elected, and if they are not why are the major European political parties spending so much time and money contesting every word, slogan and move these minority parties make?
Complain about this comment
#2
"Finally Mark, your last comment suggests that you are joining the ranks of us that..."
I suspect that all it shows is that Mark can debate an issue, be the 'Devils Advocate', without actually telling anyone what he personally thinks or what his politics are.
Complain about this comment
#3
"And since, these days, the EU initiates 80% of the UK's laws, this demonstrates why it is crucial to re-assert our ability - and sovereign right - to govern ourselves."
Max, would you have posted the same comment had Mark written 'If the far right were to win most seats the sort of laws coming out of the EU would have a much bluer tinge.', what about if he had written 'If the centrist parties were to win most seats the sort of laws coming out of the EU would have a neutral tinge.'?...
I really don't understand why people in the UK are so reticent about laws and regulation coming out of the EU, an organisation were the UK can have direct input into the policies but lie back and think of 'Kent in Summer'whilst the US tells our government what they want from us - every PM since Churchill has done so with little or no question...
Complain about this comment
Once we have jailed/sacked or otherwise removed our own corrupt politicians, whichever party wins the next election must insist on withdrawing any contribution to the obvious and unchecked corruption in the European institutions. If this fails to result in a proper audit of Europe's institutions, for which we are all paying, then Britain must withdraw from the organisation. We neither need or profit from membership of the European Union, there appears to be no monetary advantage, our borders and our laws have been degraded and the security supposedly gained from Europe has led to a massive risk from within.A vote either for Ukip or a vote for the unthinkable BNP seems to be the best alternative to our useless main parties who seem to be pawns of Brussels.
Complain about this comment
#7
"Although I would not normally vote for UKIP, this June I will. They are the only party who are committed to getting us out of the present European set-up."
Before you do, please do ask them (any anti EU party) - "What then?"
What will the UK be then, a little island on the west cost of the EU (the EU will survive any temper tantrum by the UK, even the UK and Ireland), for example what if the EU will only trade with on their own terms, say hello again to Customs posts, lorries carrying out vital export goods having to fix TIR* notices to their trailer if they don't want to spend days having their cargo checked against the manifest. Oh well, at least the dockers will again have the power of hold the country to ransom again...
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIR_Treaty
Complain about this comment
#12
"We neither need or profit from membership of the European Union"
Many would disagree with that (even those who don't like the political direction that the EU has taken and hark back to the old days of the EEC and their wine lakes or butter mountains etc.), but heck, it's a good slogan, I'm surprised that UKIP or BNP don't use it...
Complain about this comment
I stand in amazement at the sheer blind hypocrisy of those who would manipulate or pervert the whole democratic process to suit their own domestic agenda, then plead with us to ignore the same process to demonstrate the futility of it all, then lump the blame on the media, then presume to lecture us on their alternative model of democracy.
Get off your butts, campaign on equal terms, go and vote or sit down, shut up and live with the inevitable consequences. But do not attempt to sell it me as democracy.
Complain about this comment
#13, Boilerplated,
You say 'Before you do, please do ask them (any anti EU party) - "What then?"'
I'm afraid that scaremongering, which is what this frequently repeated theory is, is often the last gasp of a faltering system. If the only defence of continued UK membership is fear of the replacement then the argument has been lost. As always it is worth remembering the net contribution that the UK pays, second only to Germany's, how will that be replaced should the UK leave. Any Tariff or Regulation barriers could well have a negative rebound effect on the EU as the UK imports far more than it exports, thus petty penalising of a non EU UK would financially effect the EU at least as much if not more, as in a time of crisis there are a lot of other suppliers out there who would be very happy to export to the UK.
Therefore as to "what then" all that any party can say is there will certainly be initial difficulties but they will not be insurmountable as nobody and nothing is irreplaceable, or to put it as threnodio said the other day, "where there's a will there's a way". Any referendum must be considered on the basis of merit rather than fear of the unknown.
Complain about this comment
Boilerplated @11,
Yes. It is a matter of principle.
(Look it up, it's in the dictionary).
Complain about this comment
Are we,in UK,to vote for the same EU that regards 'no' votes as inconvenient,and then requires those who vote 'no' to vote again? In this,I have the good citizens of Eire in mind,when voting for the ''Lisbon Treaty''
Complain about this comment
#16
"#13, Boilerplated,
You say 'Before you do, please do ask them (any anti EU party) - "What then?"'
I'm afraid that scaremongering,"
No, it's a serious question, nowhere have I read anything from UKIP about 'What then', apart from ill-defined notions that the UK would be able to trade with it's old commonwealth partners - what makes UKIP think that they will be interested in doing that, they have their own trading partners, Australia hasn't even decided if they want to remain in the 'commonwealth', Canada is far more interested in the North American Free Trade Agreement than trading with the UK. It's nice rhetoric on the part of UKIP, but that is all it is - go on, ask that question and examine the answer given (assuming you get an answer)...
As for any EU trade gap, you forget, whilst there might be a couple of countries in the west who might leave the EU how many are there in the east wanting to join, countries that will more than fill any trading gap left by both the UK and Ireland - don't assume that the EU will want or need to trade with the UK, they don't and quite frankly never have needed to! Also, expect many factories to close, Nissan, owned buy Renault for example, or Honda, why would they want to keep their factories going outside of the EU (especially when they could move to eastern EU countries and benefit from lower running and staffing costs), the whole point in building plants in the UK was to access the EU markets from the inside - that is NOT pay import taxes - once the UK leave the EU then those fees might well come back. Oh and what is the UK going to do with a million or so retired people who might decide that (now) being an immigrant is not for them and decide to return to "old-blighty", what about the thousands of men, woman and their children who will no longer have a right to work or stay in the EU if/when their 'EU passports' become null and void?
Yes, leaving the EU is so easy to say, pity that in practice it's not so palatable once the political hype and rhetoric are stripped away... I implied elsewhere in another blog, some anti-EU political parties don't seem realise that we are in the 20st century, never mind the 21st.
Go on, before voting, ask that question - "What then?"
Complain about this comment
#16 - Buzet23
You are absolutely right. If there were no alternatives available, the whole process would be pointless. However, the 'what then' question is not an unreasonable one. Imagine putting to sea and the skipper when asking 'Where to?' is told 'Oh, we had not thought of that'.
Yes I think you are perfectly entitled to demand your referendum on the EU but I think we are equally entitled to ask what your alternative game plan is. Otherwise it is intellectually the equivalent of holding a referendum on the abolition of dry land without offering a plausible explanation of how to live under water.
Complain about this comment
Please stop refering to the European elections ! They are not European but EU ELECTIONS ! I know that Barrosso (the un-elected commission's president) recently said that ' Europe is now 27 countries ´, but you should know better Mark because you are better informed than he is...and more honest with your choice of words.
Norway and Switzerland are also part of Europe but neither is represented in the EU parliament as they are not members of the EU.
Ironically enough,the billboard on the left features the FDP candidate who said recently `If the EU applied for membership in the European Union,it would be rejected for lacking in democracy ´.
I am aware that the EU parliament only came into being through clauses in various treaties,but as Europeans were never ASKED if they wanted such an institution...surely they have no real mandate ? What do you think ?
Why on earth give the `parliament ´ the legitimacy it so sorely craves when the same people REFUSED to RESPECT millions of Dutch,French and Irish voters ?
Don't do it !
Complain about this comment
Oh goody! Another chance to vote for a party list of people I've never even heard of; who I won't meet on my doorstep; and who I'll never hear of or see again.
Seeing how S. Belisconi selects MEP candidates, it is little wonder why the other EU political parties have made such a big deal about it all. Why we need this expensive veneer of democracy in europe is beyond me. The Commission and the Council of Ministers would surfice. Surely the twenty odd ministers for sink plugs and their civil servants could come to some agreement between themselves. The Commission could then implement it by issuing the appropriate Directive and national parliaments could pass it to law.
Damm! I forgot we haven't got anyone to represent our views on the subject, like some body where the legislation on sink plugs can debated in depth.
Now if you're a prospective MEP please call round so I can grill you on such like. Only then will you get my vote. If not I'll be FORCED to give it to someone who wants to destroy the whole institution.
Complain about this comment
#18
"Are we,in UK,to vote for the same EU that regards 'no' votes as inconvenient"
Yes, just like it's the same UK were 'No' to the Poll-tax was ignored (for example and assuming we take the popular vote and not the first past the post result), this is what really gets true democrats annoyed, these anti EU pontificators keep going on about democracy but many (especially on the right) now little or nothing about the subject - at least the EU uses proportional representation to elect MEPs, a socialist supporting constituent who is worried about workers rights doesn't have to seek help/advice from a disinterested right-wing free-market supporting MEP, nor does a capitalist worried about union powers doesn't have to seek help/advice from a disinterested communist MEP - the constituent can call upon the most appropriate MEP in his or her area.
Complain about this comment
#22
"Damm! I forgot we haven't got anyone to represent our views on the subject"
Than stand yourself, form you own political party, stand as an independent (you might even be able to get EU funding to do so) - if it means that much you would...
Complain about this comment
It is hardly surprising that European politicians would be excited about being MPs in the EU Parliament. I'll bet if their expense accounts were audited, the existing and past members' abuses would make the current MP scandal in the UK Parliament look like small potatoes. Becoming an MP in the EU Parliament is the brass ring for a politician, a ticket to the best that the good life has to offer. The finest hotels, the best food, drink and entertainment taxpayer money can buy. I'll bet most EU Parliamentarians could tell you with great accuracy from personal experience whether or not the 1990 Chateau Margaux is the equal of the glorious 1986 vintage and which one makes a better match up with roast rack of lamb. The most important thing to remember for them is that when planning the ordeal of a trip between Brussels and Strasbourg, if you are going to drink one, it is important to decant before you leave in the chauffeur driven Mercedes Limo so that the sediment doesn't get into the wine and spoil the flavor. Even a Mercedes limo can't filter out all of the bumps in the road that might raise the sediment. On second thought, perhaps a great vintage of Dom Perignon would be a better choice. A few well chilled bottles in a portable cooler should do just fine for an MP and his mistress.
Complain about this comment
#25 - MarcusAureliusII
There is a conspiracy in the UK. It goes something like this. MPs do what they do out of a sense of public duty. It would not therefore be 'good form' to reward them properly. Equally, nobody will be intereted in the job if there is nothing in it for them. So the system dreamed up the bottomless trough and invited the piggies to nose dive as deep as they like. Unfortunately, someone else with a sense of public duty (nothing to do with the 300 grand, you understand) thought it would be a good idea to blow the scam wide open.
MEPs do not operate under these constraints. They expect to be well paid and they are. But there is absolutely no excuse no excuse for pig troughing is there? So of course, they would not dream of doing it - would they?
Complain about this comment
Hmm, what to put in place of the European Union in the United Kingdom?
Well, of course, opinions on that delightful situation will be many and varied.
I can only put my own verrsion of things and stand back for the bric-bats to follow.
First: Let us assume, for arguments sake, Scotland votes in a Referendum to renegotiate its own terms to remain in the EU and thereby deservedly moves to full independence and off the backs of the English Tax-payer; also, Northern Ireland, by some metamorphosis sorts out its own sectarian mess and finally gets off the backs of the rest of the British Isles, especially England; now I suspect Wales will vote the way of remaining in union with England when a majority (remember, I am only suggesting, not stating certainties) of English vote in a Referendum to withdraw from the EU within 2 years.
Thus we have an England and Wales scenario to consider:
Second. Wales' devolved Assembly takes powers similar to the present ones pertaining to Scotland inc. additional Tax-raising powers - other than that Wales remains unified to England and returns elected MPs to Westminster.
Third: The much reduced 'union' adopts Proportional Representation for all Council, Regional and National (inc. Welsh Assembly) elections. The proviso being the notorious Party List type of selection of elected members is a non-starter.
Fourth: England and Wales new 'Coalition Government' within the first 5 year term of Parliament writes a Minimalist Constitution.
The only aspects to be confirmed before the MiniC. is researched, written and passed onto the Statute Book being 1) PR will be compulsory, 2) Referendum must be held whenever 10% of eligible Citizens (i.e. adults between 16 and whatever) on-line sign a petition on any issue calling for one, 3) Westminster and Welsh Assembly will have 6 year fixed terms, 4) If an encumbent Government is defeated on a matter of Taxation/Fiscal policy in a Referendum its resignation and a General Election must be held within 1 calendar month, 5) Wales to determine its own number of Constituencies; England to apportion its Constitiencies so every 200,000 qualified electors has min 1 representative at Westminster (this should reduce number of MPs) 6) Members of the Westminster Parliament will receive a fixed salary on a sliding scale according to length of service and responsibility post; MP remuneration will be reviewed by an independent body every 9 years (no appeal), and, MP Pension will be on a sliding scale according to service and level of contributions, 7) No Government Cabinet shall exceed 21 Minister Of State posts with each post entitled to maximum 2 Junior Ministers.
After that it's all up for grabs! Literally.
Now, FINALLY, on the what after the EU!? Well, big party obviously, lots of cakes and sweets for the kids...
Then on a serious note England and Wales review every Trade-Fiscal-Economic deal/commitment made with the EU by former UK membership: Some will be easily continued, some will cause squabbles and a very few will be thrown out either by E and W or by the EU. Where common interests can be established all to the good and that should be the priority of E and W negotiators as it will be for the EU who will not want to lose the E and W market place of 53,000,000, anymore than E an W want to lose out when 'free-at-last-great-god-almighty-free-at-last', they can utilise all their entrpreneurial skills in an EUmarket of 370 million.
Clearly all Social-Judicial-Military-Foreign policy agreements made with the EU affecting E and W sovereignty will be revoked at once.
There should be no reason to tighten up any of the existing free-flow/exchange of goods, personnel, businesses etc. that presently exists with Scotland unless EU regulation necessitates some form of official negotiation and pacts agreed.
Subject to International Agreements and Regulations, England and Wales should actively seek the cooperation and partnership of the European Union in border controls, currency, transport, fisheries etc. whilst always retaining and pursuing the interests of English and Welsh Citizens in all matters (as the EU naturally would do on its part).
The significant difference in it all? There would be no more humbling by the axis of ill-intent based around Paris-Berlin-Brussels and neither would the venal, corrupt, undemocratic EU Commission and Parliament have to put up with the UK/England constant opt-out requests etc. Both sides return to a normalcy of international relations that enables all to move forward within their own natural borders and instincts whilst honestly and credibly serving and maintaining the historical-cultural uniqueness.
England and Wales policy in the following areas:
Foreign - retain strong commitment to U.N.O., but, willingness to give up Security Council place if it is called for by a majority; negotiate and strengthen ties with the USA, Russian Fedration and China; negotiate and strengthen ties with Commonwealth Nations; secure favourable trading status with the European Union,
Defence - retain strong commitment to NATO; if the Security Council seat is removed then reduce all military 'peacekeeping' contribution to the U.N.O.; maintain present Nuclear Weapon option, but, over time reduce commitment and dependence on it.
England and Wales should actively seek to form the hub of a new global entity that supports, develops and installs as a priority the most advanced Environmental-Climate friendly services, equipment etc. It should be ruthless in its pursuit and aquisition of 'new' science and technology that enhances the ecological-humane structures of not just the the 2 sectors of the British Isles but the planet at large.
Complain about this comment
We do not know who draws up laws. Apparently some three civil servants do so and they get approved. Caroline Flint the British "Minister for Europe" hasn't read the Lisbon Treaty. We don't know the name of our own MEP.
Well we know what our own MPs here in the UK think of us and we know now how strong their moral fibre is. Thoughts previously thought of as blasphemous now circulate the Internet Is Arab oil money the reason why there is this tsunami of Islamic migration? Was the icon of the most popular party in Holland refused entry into Britain because of the enticement of the Pakistani telephone vote?
One can be sure of what a majority of British voters are thinking. The cry "They're all the same" doesn't just refer to the sameness of the political parties in their attitude to immigration, multi-culturalism, crime, euro affairs etc but to sleaze.
I predict a strong vote to the 2 patriotic "minor " parties
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#26
"MEPs do not operate under these constraints. They expect to be well paid and they are. But there is absolutely no excuse no excuse for pig troughing is there? So of course, they would not dream of doing it - would they?"
Well one UK MEP has, and guess what party is was a member of at the time - UKIP! Can't say much more about it because I think it's in the process of going through the law courts at the moment.
Complain about this comment
#28
"We don't know the name of our own MEP."
Well that is your fault not a problem with the EU, you have access to the internet, look them up* - or do you not know where you are in the UK either?!...
* http://www.europarl.org.uk/section/your-meps/your-meps
Complain about this comment
To EU or not to EU, that question is not up for a vote....ever again. It's more than peculiar. It's like watching 27 drowning men, none of whom are able to swim hang on to each other for dear life. Somehow it's as if since none of them can swim on their own they think they could all swim if they attached themselves together. As they do, the faster sinkers only pull the more buoyant ones down with them faster than they would have drowned otherwise.
I saw a report that Germany's economy shrank 3.8% in the first quarter this year, twice as fast as the UK's. The trends will be interesting to follow to see how they compare to each other, France, and the world economy as a whole.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8051332.stm
Europeans can take satisfaction in the fact that despite the gloomy news, at least the MEPs will still enjoy the same high standard of living they always have no matter what happens. Small wonder most of Europe's politicians support the EU and want to be MEPs themselves. Can I become an MEP even though I'm not European?
Complain about this comment
@threnodio
getting off one's butt...
As a Paneuropean and EU citizen by choice without blinkers I am addressing my members of the EU Parliament as is an old tradition. I am, in fact, addressing the Parliament as such in a specific matter of corruption. It is about a grant issued by an EU body,the Educational Audiovisual and Cultural Executive (EACEA). This is,of course,only one of many steps that have been undertaken in this matter. Fuller details would fill a book by now and the matter is still very much alive for it's many ramifications.
The EACEA had 72 Million for three years (2004 to 2006) to spend on a particular programme (to promote active citizenship no less!).
The Commission concerned has had to present to the Parliament a report on the achievement of this project(...the overall and individual effectiveness of the various actions etc.). I am quoting here from Article 7 from the Official Journal of the European Union.
The Parliament, it is my view, has been duped by the Commission concerned and as such the Parliament should take action. Although I have informed some leading lights of that Parliament already I shall now write to them formally and openly requesting to demonstrate their committment to the Parliament as well as the citizens of the EU.
Regards
Joe
Complain about this comment
No one here seems to be interested in the theme attention, but Mr. Mardell: Who is going to create attention on politics and decisions in the EU: The media!
The picture above shows to bills from the German campaign. Those, who can read German, get an idea of how efficient as communication the bills of SPD (Labour) are. - The SPD and their campaign bureau have chosen to make bills, which in a sharp but also funny way criticise the competitors among the other (German) parties. These bills can be seen on all major roads in Berlin and if you overlook them youre probably not interested in politics at all.
Complain about this comment
boilerplated and #23 / #24.
re: "..these anti-EU pontificators.."
Well, there's certainly no doubt about your pro-EU stance.
Infact it is so impressive I was wondering if you could help us 'antis' out with a few things?
Maybe, as you know so much about 'democracy' compared to us, you could explain how an EU Parliament which since 1999 never got even a 50% turnout of pan-European electorate has a mandate for its MEPs (please don't refer to local Council elections, they manifestly do not create National/International law)?
Perhaps from your knowledge and experience of Proportional Representation (which is not in itself a bad system) you could give an illustration of when exactly 1 EU Citizen amongst 400,000,000 has had occasion to "..call upon the most appropriate MEP in their area.." and had their problem dealt with and resolved by that 1 MEP?
Being fairly ignorant, I'm sure I've simply missed the legions of examples of this truly proletarian experience of EU democracy in action!
Finally, why would any of us plebians need to stand or form our own party when you could also stand and do the job for us? Come on, don't be shy!
I mean, you apparently know so well how the system works that you can reply now telling us which EU MEP Candidate in your area you are voting for, their Political Party, the Political Grouping within Brussels they will be attached to, and of course, you can identify those Policy initiatives/interests your choice of Candidate shares with you?
In fact you are probably on first name terms with your choice, aren't you?
When I lived in a Surrey Constituency I personally knew the 2 Conservative MPs (not by my vote) who were elected during my residence in the area and I also knew their Labour and Lib Dem rivals; I had occasional contact with the local Communist and Green Party actvists who stood at Council elections and without fail all of them were interested in the community they sought to serve.
Lest you think that is genteel Surrey, let me assure, it was a similar experience in my younger years when based at Winchester and the local officials always paid attention to us service people.
Now, if you are claiming EU Citizen 1 will have that same sort of representation and response amongst 400,000,000, I insist you give chapter and verse!?
According to your previous comments it should be no problem at all.
Complain about this comment
#19, Boilerplated, and #20 threnodio,
Nobody can know for sure what would happen were the UK or England (as ikamaskeip says in #27) to leave the EU, but as has also been said here the EU is not European and increasingly there are ambitions for non-European countries to join it. What trading partners the UK would have is not possible to calculate but one effect that is more certain is that logistics points that involve other EU countries might have to be also located in the UK due to EU vindictiveness. Thus far from the few factories we have left being closed it could easily work the other way and end up with more facilities being created in the UK. Remember a market of circa 60 million people is a very interesting market place for companies, were the UK a small country then the results of leaving would be more dangerous. Therefore whilst it is not a bad idea to air the alternatives and maybe even sound out the major players, it is all pure speculation, and much will depend on the vindictiveness of an increasingly red tinged EU, where we know from the past century that Socialism cannot tolerate being rejected as it regrettably does not follow its dictionary definition but thinks it and only it knows best.
In summary, there must be a lively discussion and much careful and thought out planning on the after-EU scenario but invoking fear of the after world is scaremongering and not a justification to remain. As for there being "many in the East waiting to join", I don't want a world government and don't want to be part of one, look at the farce the UN often is, and there is most certainly an ambition to move that way within the EU powers that be.
Complain about this comment
#35 - ikamaskeip
Ah yes, Winchester. That was where the Labour and LibDems conspired to secure a majority so that they could run Hampshire solely for the benefit of their power base in Portsmouth, Southampton and Basingstoke leaving the rest of the county effectively unrepresented. Very democratic that was.
Complain about this comment
Just a point on the subject of proportion representation and its list system that exists in my Belgium. In my own region I have seen during the last few weeks that not only is each party fighting against the other competitor parties, but also candidates on each list are fighting against their own list candidates for votes. This in-fighting is most unsavoury, with posters being replaced during the night, defaced, ripped off etc, the other night I confronted two such operators who were trying to replace a poster of the local candidate with one of their own from far away in the region, at 2 am in the morning. This is also illegal here as it is only permitted between 6 am and 10 pm, but this is simply ignored. In the list system the candidates are ranked by their seniority with so many 'candidates' and after that so many 'reserves', but they act like a herd of pigs shuffling to get their snouts in the trough first and willing to do almost anything to achieve it.
Therefore, please don't think that PR is a sure answer, there are a lot of negatives and the conspiracy that threodio refers to in #37 is rife over here where the parties divide up the spoils before the vote. What needs to be reformed in the first past the post system is the way boundaries are manipulated for political gain and the farce that is called postal voting, that has been called third world voting by at least one judge.
Complain about this comment
If you don't vote, then you're showing that you're happy with the status quo. If you want the EU to change - from a technocracy into a democracy; from a money-waster into a money-saver; etc - then go vote.
As Mathiason noted, the media must carry a lot of the blame for the lack of interest in, or even hostility towards, the EU. How many news media have an EU correspondent?
However, our governments are to blame also. First, they have a problem in admitting the need for, and the benefits of belonging to, the EU. They will grudgingly admit that various agencies, boards, tribunals, etc are necessary in carrying out the day-today government of their own countries. But they find it impossible to recognise publicly that such bodies are needed in dealing with the transnational interactions, within Europe especially. The "machine" that is named the "EU" was put together to help deal with issues that individual governments found too difficult, or too complex to deal with alone. This "machine" is now in need of severe renovation: but our governments won't do anything unless we, the voters, pressure them into it.
Second, the EU is a useful "whipping horse" for member governments. Anything useful coming out of the EU (and there is plenty ) is not reported as coming from the EU - but from our own government. Anything the public doesn't like can be blamed on the EU - even if our own government was the instigator of the action.
Individual EMPs don't all put themselves out to be available to their electorate. Nor do many blog or put out press releases about their EU involvement.
In summary, the media, governments and individual EMPs are all happy with the status quo. They can keep on misinforming us, misleading us, or just simply leaving us in the dark. Unless we take action.
Complain about this comment
PS One of the craziest stunts I've heard of for trying to raise voter interest in the EU elections. Hervé Morin, leader of a centrist party here in France leapt into lac d'Annecy (Haute Savoie) - temperature 9°.
I'm not sure whether the message was something like "the EU needs a cold bath" - maybe it should have been?
Complain about this comment
#39, frenchderek,
Considering the range of candidates in my own area who are either all pro status quo or fanatic or off-beat fringe candidates, who can a disenchanted voter vote for. In Belgium voting is obligatory and there is no 'null' or 'no suitable candidate' box, some people claim a spoilt paper is recorded as such and some claim the vote is allocated across the parties. I would like to see the Lists having a box where disenchanted voters can register their disapproval if there exists no candidate with whom they are comfortable, but then that would be democratic I guess.
Complain about this comment
#40, frenchderek,
Or maybe being French he doesn't know the difference between a lake filled with water and a wine lake, lol.
Complain about this comment
threnodio and #37.
re: "..Winchester.."
Well, if you say so.
Then again if we're pointing fingers just who is that eminent Conservative Lady convicted of 'gerrymandering' sale of houses to ensure the 'right' people move in and vote Tory!?
Come on, I was just making the general point to 'boilerplate' that in my younger years I experienced a reasonable degree of local representation by MPs, Councillors and that I doubted it could ever be the same in a vast EU.
Complain about this comment
#43 - ikamaskeip
Yes it's a fair point. Mine was simply that we can find fault with any system if you start referring to specific instances. In general, I would agree that the list system fails miserably in producing MEPs who are directly accountable to constituents. I personally favour single transferable vote but that would not entirely solve the problem of the sheer size of the constituency. This is why I champion devolving as much power as is feasible as far down the chain of government as possible.
This is why I reject Jukka Rohila's highly centralised French model. It is also why I agree with you about the British union being a dead project. In fact, the only point of difference - a big one I garnt you - is that I want to change it, not walk away from it.
Complain about this comment
Frenchderek and #39.
"..lack of public interest.. Media must take blame.. How many news media have an EU Correspondent?"
Classic 'shooting the messenger' scenario!
Now I don't agree at all about the news media affecting public interest in the EU Elections: Afterall, it is a disinterest that manifests itself in almost every one of the 27 nations.
However, that is a very interesting question you pose: So, I thought I would take a little time and research your implication that the EU suffers from a poor News Media coverage.
In England the Guardian, Times, FT, Telegraph, Mirror and Mail all have a person designated either exactly European Editor or European Affairs etc., but not specific to the EU. I was unable to find out about the other UK National press, so cannot say one way or the other.
From the UK the BBC (TV, ON-Line and Radio), SKY, and CNN all have European Editors and all 3 run specific European Desks and have specific personnel identified to report on the EU.
In the lead-up to the June Elections the newspapers listed above plus the Express, Sun and Observor all have on-line sites with Q and A plus discussion/factsheet pages on the current EU issues.
It would seem that the EU is well represented in all thse media outlets, but, of course that is not to say it is 'favourable/supportive' coverage in a manner you might prefer to see/read/hear.
On that issue it surely is down to the EU to work at improving its image.
It is not the media's fault that the EU fails to project a view of itself other than as an overmighty, venal, unwieldy, in the main undemocratic and unaccountable institution. Did the Media write Giscard D'Estaign's incredibly complex, hopelessly unsympathetic and wholly unworkable Constitution that was rejected by pro-EU founders Netherlands and France? Is it the Media that had EU Commission Pres Barroso within 24 hours of the Eire 'no' to Lisbon stating that Lisbon "..must happen.." and thereby categorically rejecting the will of a people? Were the Media at fault when in 1999 the entire EU Commission was forced to resign due to corruption? How are the Media reducing the popularity of the EU when they report the 'Federalist agenda/project' referred to at every turn by the EU Commission and Civil Service when there is absolutely no clear pan-European Electoral mandate for them to follow this policy? When the Media reported that EU Polls/Surveys showed no majority in the 12 for the 'expansion to the East' but the EU went ahead who was reflecting public opinion?
No, I am sorry, but the 'messenger' may not be bringing welcome news, but, that is clearly the fault of the EU: By its unresponsive, unaccountable and inflexible attitudes to the 400,000,000 Citizens it is has the colossal nerve to claim to represent it is quite literally shooting itself electorally in both feet and hands and thus handicaps the European Parliament electoral turnout at every turn.
Were I really cynical (ahem!) I would say that is precisely what Barroso and the other EUrocrat clones and drones actually prefer!?
Complain about this comment
Media reporting in different European countries and the campaigning of different parties up to the election in June are generally taking place within a national framework. Why are matters of common interest not being discussed in a common forum across the national borders?
Apart from computer programs only capable of digesting the character set of one language, the reversed process of establishing the institutions of a representative democracy before having established a border-crossing democratic public might suggest why there are difficulties in getting more people involved in the matter.
Since the Maastricht treaty in 1992 the union is developing into a political cooperation not least because a group of big and small countries in the centre of EU wants it, and despite the circumstance that the member countries dont agree on the tempo or the direction. Propelling this development are the common market, the ecological question and the global development. It makes the countries pooling their powers in foreign policy and in trade negotiations.
If the Lisbon treaty is overturned it will make this process more unpredictable, but before the Irish in the autumn are reporting back about their position we all have a chance to elect our representatives to the EP.
It was already a piece of security policy between old enemies, not least France and Germany, when the EU began back in the 1950s.
In the sixties it developed into an economic arrangement, which was deepened in the 1980s after a Danish commissioner, a former finance minister in his country, proposed the common market. This market is the main reason, why the reluctant UK has now been a member for almost forty years and probably will remain a member. The least the sceptics in the UK could do, if anybody was supposed to take their arguments seriously, were to explain why it would be better for the UK to withdraw from the common market while still having this market as a major goal for British export (and therefore a subject to its standards), instead of revealing that they dont understand the representative democracy.
Complain about this comment
I am aware of the orthography of don't but the BBC computer will neither accept my apostrophes nor my diacritics.
It is of course the same problem for a Frenchmen, a Czech, a German...
Jørgen Mathiasen
Complain about this comment
@ ikamaskeip #45: having a European Editor, or even an EU Editor is not the same as having a Brussels office. Too many news media rely on agency "feeds". And, by the way, I am happy if the reporting is critical - so long as it's truthful. OK it will be selective - but that is an editorial right. We all do the same in our responses to blogs such as Mark's. But then there are the others I targeted?
I'm an EU supporter but I am very (but very) unhappy at the way it's being run. Wasteful expenditure (by member nations as well as by the EU institutions); lack of real democracy; lack of Commission leadership - by guess who?; over-tight control by the PMs and Presidents of the Council of Ministers; and, and, and. That is why I would like a campaign of harassment for change. Make the guilty parties more responsive to us, the electorate.
Complain about this comment
Earlier, I noted how member governments were unwilling to admit that they need the EU, to act as a bigger voice (and sometimes force) in the world than any individual state could. Amongst the items that most if not all member governments want to see further EU action on include security, climate change, energy - either as an EU policy or as representing EU countries in a whole range of international affairs in general, such as trade, war/peace negotiations, policing of "cease-fires", etc, etc. Many EU citizens support such measures.
Not everyone is in NATO, nor wants to be. And the UN is often of too limited value (given the difficulties in gaining sufficient support). The EU is for real. And the euro, too, come to that.
Complain about this comment
Mathiasen and #46.
Some good points in favour of the EU only spoilt by the later references to the "..reluctant UK..".
Why would UK/England withdrawal from the EU make any difference to the Trade and Duty agreements already in place?
Surely, you are not suggesting the British Isles' market of 60,000,000 people would no longer be attractive to the agriculture, fisheries, manufacturing industries and Financial services of the EU nations?
Let us have a bit of realism: The UK/England and EU could perfectly well function using practically the same arrangements as already apply; the difference being the UK/England would no longer be subject to the EU's sterile, one-size-fits-all infringement of personal liberty alongside the Economic deals.
The EU has straightforward deals with the rest of the world so why not an independent UK/England?
Why are pro-EU such as yourself so insecure about the EU that you are concerned if the UK/England Citizens are not subject to an EU Directive on hours of work, or number of holidays, quality of health services, quality of goods (if UK/England goods don't match EU standard it wont buy/import them, will it!)? Or, are you really concerned that a UK/England freed from the nonsensical EU initiatives that enforce the same regulation from Stockholm to Bucharest to Athens to Lisbon will very quickly start to outstrip the EU as its entrepreneurial skills and talents come to the fore in a once more independent off-shore State!?
Why would UK/England not choosing to be a part of the EU version of 'Democracy' be a problem to the EU when it came to Trade or cross-border controls? It seems to function on a reasonably straightforward level despite the Pound/EUro Fiscal difference; there seems to be no problem for EU or UK Business to manage their affairs.
It is a little silly and shows a lack of credibility on your own part to accuse UK/England Citizens who are 'anti-EU' of being unable to "..understand the representative democracy,": We, who oppose membership, do not consider the EU advances the 'democratic' cause any further and we believe there is far more likelihood of Reform and progression in the Political system of the UK/England if we withdraw from the pan-European EU style of democracy.
UK/England withdrawal makes no difference to the EU continuing down its chosen 'Federalist' path: It would probably ease the situation for people who are willing to exchange their children and grandchildren's future Rights and Responsibilities as free-will individuals for some relatively easily achieved comforts in the present. That is entirely your 'Democratic' privilege and I do not begrudge you your view no matter how much I may disagree with it. Why do you begrudge the UK, and English 'antis' in particular, the privilege of scepticism about where the Federal EU is headed? Why are so many 'pro-EU' disappointed and hostile to our instinct that 2,000 years of hard won freedoms and a unique historical-cultural entity is at risk from abandoning it for some spurious future pan-European bonhomie that has failed disastrously at every previous attempt!?
Complain about this comment
The forthcoming EU elections may be the most important that have ever taken place in Britain, for all the wrong reasons. When I studied the British Constitition I was the only student at odds with the lecturer over it being a disaster waiting to happen . It is unwritten, (forget the Bill of Rights , still legal but you try using it) and has no sanctions against a bad MP or Parliament. The lecturer insisted the proection was in honourable resignations by a failibg government or an MP found wanting, ha ha.
Abandon their jobs and lose all that money ? Unless we get a general election now, the Euro elections will be the only way, barring revolution, to show our anger. This could be the best turn out ever, and still they wont take the hint and GO.
Complain about this comment
frenchderek and #48.
Perhaps the reason most of the various Media do not have an EU Office in Brussels is that they too recognise how unpopular and unsupported the EU is amongst the Citizens of Europe. Therefore, being ever mindful of profit margins, the Media outlets do not want to be seen supporting an institution that is so patently out of reach and touch with a huge swathe of their Customer-base.
Afterall, it is their Customer Citizens who buy their Newspapers, listen to their Radio programmes and watch their Television channels: Maybe their Marketing/Advertising experts have advised them that cosying up to the EU is not to their longterm advantage anymore than it is for the average Briton and European!?
Your idea of a "..campaign of harrassment.." sounds logical until we examine how the EUrocrats and Commission actually respond to any opposition of that sort.
I can think of no better example of harrassment than the Netherlands, France and Eire 'No' in Referenda: Net result Pres Barroso et al just sail straight on regardless and have absolutely no concern for the popular will of the Citizens. The Media Report this flagrant ignoring of the Electoral Mandate, but, they too are very largely ignored except at election time (just like the Citizens) for the EU has no more interest in maintaining and supporting a 'democratic' 'free press' than it has in allowing its Citizens' voices to be not only acknowledged but taken up. Thus your 'harrassment' is a non-starter as the EU does not accept any negative about itself in any circumstance.
No, far better to stay away from the Ballot box altogether and let Barroso proclaim to the enquiring Media that a pan-European electoral turnout of under 40% is another "..triumph of EU democratic tradition..".
We can all rest assured the Media will Report that ringing endorsement with due diligent contextualisation!
Complain about this comment
#51 - xTunbridge
When I studied British Constitution (it seems I was somewhat earlier than you - mid-sixties, in fact), your lecturer would have been right. Ministers who got it wrong did fall on their swords. I imagine that, in this day and age, John Profumo would be back in the cabinet in a few weeks. The difference was that they were 'gentlemen amateurs'. There was not a lot of money in politics in those days and, if you were to make your way and still live to a reasonable standard, you needed to be pretty well heeled before embarking down that route.
On the plus side, many of them were in politics purely for public service and if they betrayed or were perceived to betray the public trust, they were destined for the scrap heap of history in double quick time. On the minus side, it was very hard for conviction politicians - especially those of the left - to find their way without private incomes. So it was that the Trades Unions became MP sponsors and achieved their disproportionate influence in national politics and inadvertently hastened the Thatcher counter revolution.
The unwritten constitution was, however, more reliable than now precisely because there was an unwritten code of conduct which went with it and was largely adhered to. If you are going to have professional politicians whose primary or sole source of income is their political career, then you need transparent regulation and enforceable accountability just as you do in other professions. The language has also changed and what would then have been considered a code of confidentiality is these days regarded as a culture of secrecy. It is the same thing, of course, but quite different in terms of how we perceive it.
When the culture of secrecy collides with the principle of public accountability, the facts trickle out, become a flood, the whole process becomes devalued and the electorate, understandably are left baying for blood - and it will not always be the guilty who have to pay the price.
You are, of course, right. The forthcoming election is very important but if the British electorate are going to use it as a big stick with which to beat the political establishment at Westminster, the suitability of candidates for Strasbourg/Brussels becomes secondary. Recent goings on at Westminster may well boost turnout but for all the wrong reasons. What should be happening is that a different set of criteria are applied to this election. Protest voting is almost as pointless as abstention. In our desire to promote change at Westminster, it is important that we do not lose the opportunity to promote it at EU level as well.
Complain about this comment
The only small drawback in the EU election system is that of the party list system. You can vote OK, but only for a party and in the UK are either the lunatic fringe or the existing lunatics - how can that be democracy? I'm all for democracy, but I ask you is the party list system democracy? All that happens is that is back room somewhere the existing party 'juntas' put their friends in order and the you can choose which set of plonkers you wish! Those elected owe first allegiance to the party for their order in the list and then to their constituents! This the existing parties stay in command - yet again. Some democracy, but not much!
Oh, and when they get there the join other parties similarly 'elected' candidates to join a EU Parliamentary Group. Also the Tories are in total disarray on this one as no other mainstream party will work with them after they left the main centre right grouping - all that is left is fringe lunatics, extremeists and bigots.
Complain about this comment
#54 - John_from_Hendon
Agreed. However, PPTP is no good with constituencies that large and it is no more democratic than the party list. I posted earlier that I favour single transferable vote and I stand by that.
Complain about this comment
There are different metaphors for Great Britain_s position in the periphery of the Union, outside the Euro zone and outside the Schengen cooperation. Can you list the many British opt-outs and red lines in the EU legislation? There are a few and therefore it is strange that once again there are reactions to the word reluctant.
There is a standing invitation for Great Britain to move into the centre of the union, but so far British politicians have not wanted to make use of it.
Complain about this comment
#56 - Mathiasen
The UK opt outs (including those under Lisbon when and if it goes ahead) are:
Schengen, European Monetary Union,
Police and Judicial Cooperation and the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Ireland has also opted out of Schengen and the PJC, Denmark out of EMU, the Citizenship agreement, the ESPD and the PJC and Poland out of the CFR. Sweden has a de facto optout from EMU.
Complain about this comment
I have a UKIP leaflet in front of me which I found in my letter box.
I agree with most of it, but it doea not go far enough.
It says: "Say NO to unlimited integration."
I agree with that. It does not say "throw foreigners out!" and I am glad it does not. It does not say "Throw criminal foreigners out" which I believe it should. Similarly other countries should throw criminal Brits out.
It says: "Say NO to £40million daily EU bill."
I agree with that. I read that we now have 2 million unemployed in the UK. 40 million divided by two million makes 20. That's twenty Pounds a day for every unemployed person. That is more than I got when I was unemployed. I would use it to reduce Social Security payments which punish honest employers and honest employees.
It says: "Say NO to EU control of our lives." I agree with that.
Here are some things it should say but does not:
Catholic countries in Europe and the Americas have a greater tendency to fascism and dictatorship than Protestant ones. We should not be in a political union with Catholic countries.
Continental policing is more frequently unacceptable than British policing. There is a danger we could have despicable continental police operating here.
Turkey. They want to let Turkey into the EU. That is totally unacceptable. Turkey in the "EU" would, on its own, be a reason to leave the "EU".
We don't want a Greater European Reich. Some years ago it was reported that Helmut Kohl wanted to make integration irreversible. I am confident that Merkel, Blair, Sarkozy,, Barrosso and many others would agree. Yet another reason to leave now.
As regards what we do when we leave: I believe we just trade with the "EU" on the basis of the WTO rules. If they don't buy our stuff, we don't buy theirs. About twenty-five years ago I had the time to study the numbers. I concluded that the German trade surplus with the UK would fund about one million jobs in Germany. They wouldn't want to lose those jobs.
What don't I like about the leaflet? I don't like the colour scheme.
Complain about this comment
Surely the Lisbon Treaty/Constitution is in clear breach of the UN's International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights :
Article 1 : All peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic and cultural development.
Note the word FREELY !
The only legal means of asking a peoples approval is a referendum. anything else is an illegal coup `d etat.
IT AIN'T JUST THE BRITS !
Recent polls have shown the following :
70% of Austrians want the EU to be a loose grouping of national states that trade together with no further integration.
74% of Germans think the EU has too much power.
84% of Brits would like the EU to remain a trading block only.
Neither the un-elected commission nor the parliament speak for us.
Don't give the EU `parliament´the legitimacy it craves...either don't vote at all or vote for UKIP .
Complain about this comment
#55. threnodio wrote:
In support of STV... (Single Transferable vote)
There is I think a general disenchantment with the political classes throughout Europe. This is partly attributable to the current economic difficulties and I believe attributable to there now being a preponderance of career politicians. Many of them, if not the majority have done nothing in their lives except politics - that is the have a very limited understanding of the general population and its problems and perceptions.
None of these fancy voting systems solve this problem and I believe that unless it is addressed politicians are likely to become more remote and less representative or aware of the constituents opinions and problems, particular when voting methodologies are wrapped around the existing parties. I would like to see a limitation of any candidate's participation in politics - no more than, say, a decade once elected. This would ensure that it is not seen as a career and that politicians would have to have 'real' jobs. Perhaps we should not elect politicians, but randomly 'draft' or 'conscript' adults to do the job!
Complain about this comment
#53
"The difference was that they were 'gentlemen amateurs'. There was not a lot of money in politics in those days [pre 1970s] and, if you were to make your way and still live to a reasonable standard, you needed to be pretty well heeled before embarking down that route."
Quite true, and that is why MPs were either rich,' were sponsored by trade unions, had well paid 'day-jobs' or a combination of all three - this also explains why, until the 1980s and more recently post 1997, Parliament used to start it's day not much before 3pm in the afternoon.
"The forthcoming election is very important but if the British electorate are going to use it as a big stick with which to beat the political establishment at Westminster..."
...they had better realise that the UK parliament will take little or no notice, if the electorate want to make it unconformable for the Westminster bubble then it would be better to use the UK local elections as the means to use the big stick - for example voting UKIP in the EU elections will not 'get us out of the EU' but a local council dragging it's heals to implement the latest EU derived directive on the collection and recycling of used toffee wrapper of might well give the UK government problems.
The facts have to be accepted that the UK is among a minority of "Euro-sceptic countries - we either have to take one of three directions, as a nation;
1/. Accept that the EU is becoming a federal state (if not in name, in nature), that more and more legislation will come from Brussels/Strasbourg.
2/. That the EU has problems but it's better to campaign/agitate for change from within, whilst also still maintaining a strong voice within the legislation and policy making areas of the EU.
3/. That the EU has so many problems that they can never be sorted out, the EU's whole premiss for being is now unsustainable, it's morphed from being just a European free trade and agriculture organisation into a political institution with super-national intentions (a USoE, or as the right like to say, the EUSSR) and that the best solution for the UK is to negotiate an amicable exit whilst trying to cherry-pick what we like, such as free-trade.
The problem is, the above direction has to be taken at the Westminster or regional/local level (which then impacts on the Westminster level) not at the 'higher' EU Parliament level as only Westminster can make the decision as to what to about our EU membership - the UK could return a 'full deck' of UKIP MEPs but it's not going to have any effect at the EU level due to being the minority view in that arena - we would still be required to ratify EU laws etc. - of course the EU could just get so feed up at what it would see as disruptive behaviour/stunts that it actually expels the UK I suppose, but then they really would close ranks and borders, putting the UK very much on the back foot...
Use your EU vote so that the UK has an effective voice within the EU (even if you believe that the UK should not be in the EU), use your UK local election vote to deliver a message to either your local area or the nation as a whole, getting your votes around the wrong way will waste a vote - All in my opinion of course!
[/ramble ends...]
Complain about this comment
#59
"Article 1 : All peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic and cultural development."
If you really think that (UN) Article will 'save' the UK then you really should be telling both UKIP and the BNP not to have EU exit policies - the fact that the electorate of the UK are free to vote UKIP (or BNP) into power at the national government level means that you still have the "right to self-determination".
Sorry but the words 'Straw, clutching, at' come to mind...
Complain about this comment
#61 - Boilerplated
. . . and a very good ramble it is too!
I agree with every word adding only that, of your three options, my preference is strongly for 2.
Complain about this comment
It all sounds to me like arguing about how to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. In case anyone hadn't noticed being too preoccupied with more important matters like the Lisbon Treaty, the UK MP Scandal, and these elections, the ship hit an iceberg awhile ago, it's taking on water, and it's listing badly to one side. There don't seem to be enough lifeboats to go around. The MPs and MEPs all seem to be safely in them and some distance away already. They've got their parachutes that will take them just about anywhere safe. Anyone else got any plans to keep from drowning in the icy waters of financial collapse?
Complain about this comment
boilerplated and #23, 24, 30, 31 and my response in #35.
Still be interested to read any reply from you?
Or, are you still looking up who your own MEPs are? Plus, how 1 EU Citizen amongst 400,000,000 is somehow better represented (even by PR) than the UK Citizen as 1 of 60,000,000 with Devolved Governments in 3 of the 4 'union' nations?
Go on, give it a try; no one is gong to laugh (much).
Complain about this comment
"..the UK is among a minority of EUro-sceptics countries.."
Rather like yor earlier statements this one boilerplated just does not hold up to scrutiny!
No European Union Parliament Election has exceeded 47% Electoral turnout across the member nations as a whole (see EU own statistics).
Over 300 MEPs of the 700+ at the 2004 election were returned to Brussels with turnout in their EU Constituencies lower than for local government elections across Europe (see EU own statistics).
Only 1 in 5 MEPs elected in 2004 had received direct electoral support in excess of 35% of the possible electorate (see EU own statistics).
It is getting tiresome to keep reading how it is for Britons and Westminster to sort out its situation with regard to the EU and the sort of bland implication 'it's only the Brits' that are at odds with the EU!
At least the UK Media do reflect some of the Citizens' disquiet and concerns about the EU, unlike the docile Press and TV News coverage on the mainland.
Go to Mark Easton's UK Blog and see the Map of Citizens 'trust' in European Government - - if the British are singularly out of step with their neighbours then it is because quite a few other nations are a lot less sanguine when the Citizens are given a chance to express themselves on their Government (which inevitably inc. EU) - - there is a near conspiracy of silence amongst the body-politic and media of mainland Europe about dis-satisfaction with the EU.
I agree with Johannesstannas #59 and others who recognise the best option for Britons and Europeans is to continue to ignore and refuse to participate in these fraudulent EU Elections. As the Referenda in Denmark, Netherlands, France and Eire have clearly revealed the EU has no intention of listening to the democratic vote of its Citizens. This is a fundamental corruption of and by the EU body-politic and shows that all free-thinking, sensible Citizens should boycott the EU institutions at all levels.
Barroso etc. will still go on claiming a "victory for the EU", but, at least the blushes of the EUrocrats and MEPs will with a 3rd collapse of Citizen participation expose the fraudulent concept of the EU ever more clearly and specifically that the UK/England is not alone in its antipathy to this wretchedly undemocratic and dangerously centralising organisation.
Complain about this comment
To #10 Boilerplated:
M.M. is rather a BBC speaker than a BBC commentator. However I suspect he's unionist at home and certainly he's not at all unionist abroad, i.e. within the EU.
Complain about this comment
To # 54 John_from_Hendon:
I accept the argument that a party list is not what we expect as a really democratic option when casting our vote. However, we are permitted to choose just one candidate name out of the whole party list which in itself is good, if not perfect.
Maybe it is high time to make some general change in the election procedures, say, in enforcing the majority representation within the EP? In this way, I do hope, the personnel responsibility of a MEP will increase, at least, when he will have to report to his own supporters at home.
Complain about this comment
#66
"Rather like yor earlier statements this one boilerplated just does not hold up to scrutiny!
Oh but it does and that is what the anti EU campaigners like don't like, they don't like the facts, they spin half-truths, lies and dammed lies - such as the Lisbon treaty will make Ireland adopt free on-demand abortions, or that the Irish army will have to contribute to a EU Army (even though the Irish have traditionally taken a stance of natality and that an 'EU (fighting) army' is no certainty) or that the EU is forcing the UK to take illegal immigrants (when it's UK domestic policy, and the UK's domestic government that enshrined the Human Rights document into UK law) etc.
The facts are that the UK Euro-sceptics are, along with the other Euro-sceptic groups, a minority (not the largest) group - if the Euro-sceptics were in the majority non of us would be discussing the Lisbon treaty etc! Think about it...
Complain about this comment
#57. threnodio
It is correct that Denmark has an opt-out on the citizenship but in reality is disappeared with the Amsterdam treaty. Through this the union as such adopted the Danish interpretation of the citizenship, namely that is a supplement and not a replacement of the national citizenship.
The Danish opt-out has therefore no object and is practically without effect.
Also: The developments in this field since 2000 have been implemented in Denmark through the legislation of the parliament.
Complain about this comment
#68 ironfranco,
True we are permitted to choose one candidate in the PR open list system but what happens to that vote as in reality it is treated just as a vote for the party of that list. Wikipedia says "The D'Hondt method (mathematically but not operationally equivalent to Jefferson's method, and Bader-Ofer method) is a highest averages method for allocating seats in party-list proportional representation. The method is named after Belgian mathematician Victor D'Hondt. This system is less proportional than the other popular divisor method, Sainte-Laguë, because D'Hondt slightly favors large parties and coalitions over scattered small parties."
This method is widely used across Europe and is here in Belgium, it also means that party's gaining less than 5% of the total vote get no seats whatsoever which is why until recently the Front National had no seats, now they do. Like a few comments here the single transferable vote system seems to be far preferable as it removes the list and party concept and replaces it with the candidates you prefer to support no matter what party they are in. However I can't ever see the STV system replacing the List system as the List system is far to cosy for the established party's.
Complain about this comment
#71
"However I can't ever see the STV system replacing the List system as the List system is far to cosy for the established party's."
It could, but it will be a one chance salon, if a minority party were to every obtain an outright majority by FPTP (or hold the controlling votes in a power-sharing administration) they may well be temped to change the system in their first term, if they don't and then get re-elected to either government or largest opposition party they themselves have become an established party too...
Complain about this comment
boilerplated and 369.
Oh, for goodness sake! Not those dreary 'scare stories' again! Can't you do any better than that!?
Surely even someone as blind to the downside of EU membership as yourself cannot possibly in your wildest moments think Eire Citizens voted 'no' in their thousands because of an "abortion scare" etc. Look, if you can see through such guff how dare you suggest the Eire Citizens are so low on intellect they could not!
As for "EU forcing UK to take illegal immigrants": Where, exactly where have you read/heard this piece of misinformation other than a BNP pamphlet? I challenge you to show the newspaper/media outlet that has ever published such tosh?
What the UK Media has highlighted a number of times for the UK/England Citizens is they are right to be concened about the EU and Immigration: The complete failure of G.B. neighbours to honour their commitments to take immigrants at their 'first arrival' and not just pass them conveniently on down the chain to the Channel ports and airports.
I note you have still singularly failed to explain the 1 of 60,000,000 compared to 1 of 400,000,000 challenge and every part of my query in #35.
As I have found in the past to my own annoyance/chagrin, but in fairness, to my being pressed into seeking further knowledge, You cannot just come on these Blogs and state something as a fact unless you have genuine, logical, reasoned factual detail to back you up.
It is my contention your statement about the 'anti-EU' being a minority is unproven: It is my belief based on the Electoral turnout at the EU Parliament elections and the Referenda results that there is no Mandate and no clear pan-European Citizen support for the institution.
If you are claiming the 23 National Parliaments that validated Lisbon without daring to put it to a Citizens' vote is an example of EU 'democracy in action' then I say again, it is you that does not "..understand democratic representation..".
Therefore it is you that must "..think about it.." for surely Lisbon is only being discussed because one sensible people with a Government that is acting responsibly (EIRE) realises Lisbon IS a fundamental change to the Constitutions of member States and therefore deserves consideration by Citizens and not just those elected Governments who could not have campaigned on it as it did not exist until the D'Estaign Constitution was repudiated.
You undoubtedly would wish to pretend the Netherlands, France, Eire referenda never really happened (or they didn't really mean 'no' when they voted 'no'), hence your failure to explain EU 'democracy', but, like all 'pro-EU' your blinkered view is in the minority, or, the referenda would have been 'yes', wouldn't they!?
Complain about this comment
#70 - Mathiasen
Probably quite true. I was not venturing an opinion, simply answering your question as to the facts. I just seemed silly to list the UK opt outs and leave out all the others. That is the full list. That's all.
Complain about this comment
#69 - Boilerplated
Not being UK based, I don't get to hear first hand what the parties are saying but have the Tories ever promised to repeal the enabling legislation for Lisbon pending a referendum? I don't think so. They have made a lot of noise about what Labour should have done and what the Tories would have done but I don't recall any promises to backtrack. I may be wrong but I suspect that, unless the Irish throw a second spanner in the works, Lisbon is a done deal.
Complain about this comment
#69, Boilerplated,
What is scepticism in reality, the UK is more vocal for certain, but if you go the the EU parliament web site and search for results, turnout trends, elections2004 etc you will find a table of the figures for the 2004 election, there are also other tables for previous elections. I'm afraid it make little good reading for anybody pro-EU as there are only 11 countries out of 21 that had votes in the 40 percent's or higher, and maybe some of those, like Belgium, have an obligatory voting system. The figures for four other countries (including the UK) are not published.
Therefore it is more than reasonable to question why five countries recorded less that 30 per cent of votes, were the voters so happy about the EU that they felt they didn't need to vote or were they simply just totally fed up with the EU and its politicians, likewise the voters of the six countries that only recorded votes in the 30 percent's. Since the elections are the only way to test the water of public opinion that we have, it is fair to say that voter apathy is rampant throughout the EU and that alone does not suggest that the UK is in a small minority of EU-Sceptic countries, but rather almost alone in expressing vocally the doubts of the majority of EU citizens who did not vote in 2004.
Complain about this comment
#73
"Oh, for goodness sake! Not those dreary 'scare stories' again! Can't you do any better than that!?"
Well perhaps you should telling that to Libitas then, not me...
Complain about this comment
#75
"I may be wrong but I suspect that, unless the Irish throw a second spanner in the works, Lisbon is a done deal.
The problem is, and some might say (including me) that it's a reasonable position to take, the Tories have said that they will not (can not) make a policy on the Lisbon treaty until the nest UK general election is called because the policy will be affected by how far Lisbon has got - BUT and make not mistake about this - the Tories are Eu-sceptic, they have stated that if they were in power they would not have ratified the Lisbon treaty, the only spanner in their works is that by the time they might next be in power the treaty could be a done deal - in which case it's more of an issue of if to/how to withdraw (fully or partially) from the Lisbon treaty or the larger treaty of Rome...
Strangely as it happens, between posting my comment at #69 and replying to your comment above, the BBC have broadcast an interview with William Hague, so the above is taken from the gist of that interview, although I might well have para-phrased/interpreted some of his comments.
Complain about this comment
#76
"What is scepticism in reality..."
Ones ability to influence, to get ones policy though against differing influence and policy, in that respect the EU-sceptics (not just UK Euro-sceptics) are in the minority - if they were not Lisbon would not have happened...
Complain about this comment
#41 Buzet
In Belgium voting is obligatory and there is no 'null' or 'no suitable candidate' box, some people claim a spoilt paper is recorded as such and some claim the vote is allocated across the parties. I would like to see the Lists having a box where disenchanted voters can register their disapproval if there exists no candidate with whom they are comfortable, but then that would be democratic I guess
-----
Spoilt votes and Blanco votes are two different things:
- a spoilt vote is where you deliberately ruin your ballot (if its paper) or if you repeatedly refuse to use the magnetcard (the bankcard-like thing) that's needed to register the vote.
- a blanco vote is if you don't color any dot at all (on paper) or by chosing the option "blanco vote" with electronic.
neither spoilt votes or blanco votes are counted or given to any party.
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
it's in dutch but that shouldn't be a barrier in this day and age.
So it is perfectly possible to register your disapproval by not voting on anyone.
Complain about this comment
@suffolkboy regarding Turkey:
The UK is a big proponent of letting Turkey into the EU. The rest of Europe, not so much.
Complain about this comment
#79, Boilerplated,
You're right in that the key to the EU and its policies is in "Ones ability to influence", but I think that what we have here is a minority closed shop, traditionally fired by the franco-german axis, that believes only their vision of the future is correct and refuse to hear other alternatives. Faced with this EU elite it matters little whether the overt EU-sceptics are in a minority or majority as their views will never be listened to. I am minded to remember a poster in my doctor's that highlights the difference between democracy and dictatorship, whereby the difference is simply being told to shut up rather than have a meaningful discussion that results in compromises or alternatives.
I just hope that one day soon the EU elite will actually start to understand that their fascination with a federal EU is not shared with peoples throughout the EU, who simply want a more Social Europe without the destructive regulations that are destroying jobs and services by being ever more intrusive. By simply labelling all objections as being just those dammed EU-Sceptics they have become dictatorial rather than democratic.
Complain about this comment
#71 Buzet23
The single transferable vote system is all every second voter in Bulgaria would prefer to be established. In fact, we are (like most of the member states) a parliamentary democracy and it is still very difficult for us to adopt the SVT i.e. the majority representation. All our party leaders are against it for evident reasons. They think such a move will decrease their political statute in the society.
At the same time, what is a reason for a real concern is the fact that most of the party programs and practices in Bulgaria are very, very similar. They are oriented, more or less, to the right wing voters. Even the Socialist Party of Bulgaria (SPB) which still pretends to favor the labor class practically supports the other partners of the three party coalition, still in power. Which is the reason why many people here will not exercise the right to cast their vote on June 7th. You see friend, we would rather see in Brussels people we really know and thrust. The ordinary citizen is not much impressed by all those billboards that are exposed on every street corner in Sofia. They normally show some smiling party leader face that is promising us the. moon.
Complain about this comment
#82
"we have here is a minority closed shop"
Rubbish, there have and are Euro-sceptic political parties contesting MEP seats in just about every EU member state (be that left, centrist or right), what we have had - we will have to see how the June elections pan-out - is an inability for the Euro-sceptics to either get their message across or get it accepted by the voters, it's as simple as that.
"as their views will never be listened to."
All these Euro-sceptics you keep talking about can't be that bothered as they are obviously not bothering to use their vote, if the voting population of the EU was made up of a majority of Euro-sceptics then the Euro-sceptics would control the EU parliament, never mind being listened to!
Complain about this comment
#83 - ironfranco
This is a request for information, not an opinion.
You write "In fact, we are (like most of the member states) a parliamentary democracy . . .".
Is sovereignty vested in the people or elected representatives? This may sound like a dull technical question but it could end up being very important indeed.
Complain about this comment
#84 Boilerplated,
I looked at the party list in my French speaking area of Belgium and there is not one EU-Sceptic party, there are a number of fanatic Socialist/Communist party's and one National Front party. I therefore wonder how the 4 million voters in South Belgium can express their possible dislike of the the current direction without having to vote for a far right or Left party. I am sure that situation exists in many other states as like ironfranco says in #83 the party lists are almost always the usual similar party's we always see.
As has been said before, the faces we see on the bill boards are chosen behind closed doors and not by the citizens, therefore to be a candidate is very much a closed shop, just as to become a commissioner it is very much a closed shop working on political favouritism/correctness rather than merit.
I don't know how easy it is to become a candidate in your own country but you can easily research how hard it is to become a candidate in many countries if you don't have a party behind you, Independent candidates are neither liked or tolerated in many so called democratic countries. It's an easy way to manipulate the politics by refusing accreditation to party's who have views that are not PC.
Complain about this comment
#86
"I looked at the party list in my French speaking area of Belgium and there is not one EU-Sceptic party, there are a number of fanatic Socialist/Communist party's and one National Front party. I therefore wonder how the 4 million voters in South Belgium can express their possible dislike of the the current direction without having to vote for a far right or Left party."
By starting a political party perhaps (you never know, the EU might even give you funding to do just that...), assuming that there is actually any interest of course!
Complain about this comment
#85:
Sovereignty is vested in elected representatives of course. The problem here is that the representative democracy seems not to be perfect. It needs some refurbishment.
Complain about this comment
Boilerplated and #77.
"..Libertas.."!!!!???
Err, which part of the Electorate in the Eire referendum on the Lisbon Treaty or the previous Netherlands and France Referenda on the Constitution are you implying 'libertas' had any effect on?
They claim to have made the difference, but, as before I must ask you for verification: If you can see through daft ideas like the abortion issue what makes you think Libertas managed to fool thousands of Eire voters?
Admit it, you can't back-up your pro-EU claims so, typically of the pro-EU lobby you cast around for the negatives amongst the 'antis' in the hope that the old adage of 'mud sticks' will cover for your inadequate arguments.
Complain about this comment
Buzet23 and #76.
Your analysis is so correct: It is not UK/England on its own in deep concern and hostility to the present EU and the way it has headed with its 'Federalist project' and 'Eastward expansion' whilst neglecting the basic 'democratic' Rights and Responsibilities of the EU Citizens already trapped within it.
I and millions of Britons voted to join the EEC in 1975: Those millions did not lose their interest, respect and enjoyment of Europe overnight. Some key things have had to occur (or not occur) in order for the general antipathy that now prevails within UK/England.
I am also one of those not convinced a majority of UK/England Citizens actually want to leave/withdraw from the 'Union' of Free-Trading Nations that was in place in 1975 and expected to develop the easier 'cross-border' and 'employment' conditions that now prevail.
If the above were the present EU I am sure not only Britons but most Europeans would be keen to participate in an international entity that has done so much to avoid another mainland European war from breaking out.
How absurd and tragic for us all that such a wonderful far-sighted and far-reaching popular body should fall so low in such a short time!
That development must be laid fairly and squarely at the doors of the EU Commission and the EU Parliament: They abandoned the great 'union of like-minds' project for their own venal, corrupt ends.
I have read up on this in English, French and partly in Finnish and German and nowhere in the 1980s Media etc. can I find any suggestion the European Public were demanding 'Federalisation' and 'Harmonisation' under the sway of an all-powerful, final-arbiter European Court of Justice. Not even the Trade Unions in UK or mainland Europe were calling for the EU to take control of Social/Welfare Law-Judiciary/Policing policy-Military Defence. It is clear from EU and Business documentation that they wanted a level playing-field, but, one that enabled their international control/direction of employment-wages-production, something the UK/England notably has always stood against and is a major factor in why there is now a dislike of the EU. UK/England were the driving force for freeing up the Trade-Transport-Fiscal-Labour markets but the restrictive practises sponsored by Paris-Berlin and Brussels was at odds with that system for the last 30 or so years.
Over the decades Europeans have swung several times 'for' and 'against' the UK/England system. I would suggest as the full implications of the stifling blanket of 'Federalist EU' measures has become increasingly clear, so, the 'anti' sentiment amongst Europeans has taken hold. It is not that they agre with the English attitude/approach to how to manage their Nations' economies, as much as a realisation the EU is simply NOT the way to go about these matters as they make hostages to a 'centralising EUrotocracy' their children and grandchildren's lives
The trouble is all to do with the over-ambitious, politically and financially greed-driven supposed Commission, EUrotocracy and MEPs who were originally set-up to manage the infrastructure, NOT to rule the Nations.
Europeans, like many Britons (though not all by any means) have come to recognise the threat, but, such is the EU's all-pervasive position in the dogma and credo of mainland Politicians that most Europeans feel powerless to effect change: They certainly see a vote in the EU Elections as entirely unproductive.
When did it ever become acceptable for the President of the EU Commission to pronounce on the EU Federal project and on National Referenda on issues? Who did previous Presidents and who does this Barroso think he is to be interfering in the National debates of EU Member States? By what right does this Civil Service functionary of a Trading organisation presume to know what is good for Citizens in Tallinn, Dublin, Amsterdam, Warsaw, Bucharest, Vienna etc.?
The EU today resembles the old Imperial Chinese dynastical regime: Lots of petty officials with apparently little power but all the time scurrying over the land enforcing rules, regulations and controls on the say-so of a far off, unresponsive, all-powerful central throne-room!
That ended in decay, misery and disillusion and the EU is headed the same despicable route.
Complain about this comment
#89
Go and find out who started, and funded the Irish "NO" vote, then debate the facts rather than some wrapped anti EU propaganda, if it's not warped then perhaps you might feel willing to correct the following references;
[quote]
Declan Ganley is the founder and current Chairman of the pan-European political party Libertas and candidate for Libertas in the European Parliament election, 2009 in North West Ireland. Libertas started in 2006 as a lobby group campaigning for a No-vote to the Lisbon Treaty in the Irish Referendum 12 June 2008, and has evolved into a pan-european political movement. Libertas are running for the European Parliament election, 2009. in 20 European countries. In Rome 1 May 2009 Libertas held its first Party Congress
[unquote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declan_Ganley#Libertas
[quote (in-line referencing removed for clarity)]
Consequently, issues such as abortion, tax, euthanasia, the veto, EU directives, qualified majority voting, Ireland's commissioner, detention of three-year-olds, the death penalty, Euroarmy conscription, gay marriage, immigration, nuclear energy, workers' rights, sovereignty, and neutrality were raised, some of which were spurious or actually dealt with by the Treaty of Nice. The "No" faction could fight on whichever terrain they wished and could give positive reasons for rejecting the treaty, such as the possibility of renegotiation. Conversely, the "Yes" faction could only offer negatives and could only react to the statements of the other side. Lacking a clear identification of specifics, voters chose to vote "No".
[unquote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Referendum_12_June_2008#Reasons_for_rejection
Complain about this comment
Apparently the European Union HQ Office building has caught fire.
I am very pleased to see everyone has been safely evacuated, that no one at all has been put at risk and the Emergency Services are attending.
An unfortunate but perhaps indicative note on the actual EU process of Fire Alarm and Evacuation was that:
1) The Automatic Fire Detection and Alarm system failed entirely, and,
2) The actual Evacuation orders had to be issued verbally to those in the HQ building.
NB: The ultra-modern devices purchased after open-Tender for Contract to the EU, and following thorough testing by EU Health and Safety Committee, 'Automatic Fire Detection System' installed at immense Expense to the European Tax-Payer, will of course be the subject of a no-expense spared EU Investigation as to causes of its malfunction.
Rest assured, at no expense spared a new EU Fire Detection system will replace the defunct one: Specially recruited (following pan-European advertising of the posts) and trained (minimum 3 months fully paid plus expenses with additional Language skills development grades) EU Emergency Status Personnel will take up positions on each floor of the HQ building with the relevant HANDBELL to shake and/or WHISTLE to blow, as appropriate!
Complain about this comment
#89 - ikamaskeip
Most of the time, I follow your logic but every time you put the French and Dutch referenda in the same sentence as the Irish vote on Lisbon, it simply evaporates.
The Constitution was exactly that and required electoral endorsement. The treaty was not - on paper - a constitution. If you believe it was a ruse to deny you your legitimate democratic rights, take it up with the government concerned. You will get nowhere by branding the EU a bunch of low down cheating liars of questionable parentage when you should be blaming the bunch of low down cheating liars of questionable parentage you elected into office.
Libertas had nothing to do with it. I am waiting for a manifesto prior to the election or a punch line afterwards. As with most jokes, I am not keeping my hopes up.
Complain about this comment
#92
"1) The Automatic Fire Detection and Alarm system failed entirely, and,
2) The actual Evacuation orders had to be issued verbally to those in the HQ building."
Perhaps the fire was in the fire alarm system or cabling, not unheard of...
[quote]
Brussels firefighters say the fire was confined to a vertical shaft housing cables. It spread up from the basement.
[unquote]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8055637.stm
Complain about this comment
"I could see the smoke in the corridors, and about 20 minutes later people were told verbally to leave the building". (Darren Ennis of Reuters).
So the building is on fire, it's full of smoke and the press simply stay there till someone tells them to leave? Doh!
Complain about this comment
ikamaskeip #92
too cool....
It's reassuring to know that we still have so many things in common with our European brothers.
Complain about this comment
Fire alarm systems are something I know more than a little bit about. A functional failure such as wires being burned should be sufficient to set the alarm off immediately. These systems are supposed to be what is called "supervised" which means they fail into alarm. Only when the alarm has been verified to be a false (nuissance) alarm should they be manually silenced. Had they been built to NFPA (National Fire Protection Administration) Codes and its subcode NEC (National Electrical Code which is NFPA Chapter 70) this would have happened. The system and all of its components would have been UL listed (tested and approved by Underwriters Laboratories) inspected and tested under supervision of the local fire marshal initially and periodically and certified operational. If it was not operational, then the building would not have been occupiable until it was repaired and made functional again or unless an approved "fire watch" of people whose sole function was to watch for fire and alert facilities management to manually sound an evacuation alarm until it was restored was set up. Also, such a system would be required to obtain insurance. But this system was probably built to IEC and other international standards and possibly deficient, errors not detected, or the EU simply overruled or bribed local fire officials to overlook it. In the US, this would result in an investigation and possibly criminal and civil penalties especially if someone was hurt or killed. Living in the most litigious society in the world has its advantages. Cheap construction and operational costs isn't one of them.
Complain about this comment
threnodio and #93.
I protest!
It is beyond doubt the serving EUrocrats, MEPs etc. are low-life, venal, corrupt and beyond redemption, but, and here I must insist you retract, in no way have I questioned the Parentage of these unfortunate denizens of Brussels; for whichever side of the blanket saw their birth is as valid as any other Citizen of Europe and UK/England.
That they have fallen by the wayside so spectacularly only a veritable Saul on the Road to Damascus cosmological experience will enable them to see the light is still no reason to cast doubt on these Gallio!
Sorry, but I do not agree: Lisbon Treaty is the amended Constitution by another name, as even the most sparing of glances at its main propositions makes abundantly clear.
I believe I have also made it abundantly clerar in a number of Comments that I view the species of MP presently inhabiting Westminster (long before any costly Expenses exposure) very much in the same derogatory terms as the rarified version found in Brussels.
Complain about this comment
Boilerplate
"1) The Automatic Fire Detection and Alarm system failed entirely, and,
2) The actual Evacuation orders had to be issued verbally to those in the HQ building."
Perhaps the fire was in the fire alarm system or cabling, not unheard of...
[quote]
Brussels firefighters say the fire was confined to a vertical shaft housing cables. It spread up from the basement.
[unquote]"
Where were the alarm horns and strobes? Where was the automatic water sprinkler system (sprinkler heads are activated by heat melting a fusible link, no electrical connection required)? Where were the smoke and flame spread rated riser cables (teflon)? Where were the smoke detector heads? Where was the public address system? This is the headquarters of the EU where no expense is spared for the comfort and safety of the MEPs? What does the rest of the EU look like...to a construction engineer?
Complain about this comment
Boilerplated and #91.
Nothing you wrote about Libertas has anything to do with your inference that it made the Irish people vote 'no' to Lisbon!
So what if Libertas has Irish origins? There were/are long established Political Parties in Eire: The Irish people did not suddenly have a mind-warp and stop believing their normal Politicians!
So what if Libertas is now a pan-European Party? What has that got to do with President Barroso et al ensuring a 2nd Eire Referendum on Lisbon other than proof the EU does NOT accept 'No' under any circumstance!?
As for the Wiki Article. Look, Wiki is very good for factual research, but, you quoted an 'opinion' piece which is about as useful as mine or yours on any topic! The author of that piece was basing all they wrote on conjecture, pretty much like you have been doing on this Blog, thus, nothing of substance is proven!
I will ask just one more time: What is so bad about UK/England not being in the EU that people such as yourself are seemigly panic-stricken at the thought? And, how do you explain that 1 of 450,000,000 Citizens is likely to be better represented than 1 of 60,000,000?
Complain about this comment
#98 - ikamaskeip
"Sorry, but I do not agree: Lisbon Treaty is the amended Constitution by another name, as even the most sparing of glances at its main propositions makes abundantly clear."
Exactly. So the people concerned involved themselves in a very transparent and unsubtle subterfuge to 'rebrand' it in order to serve it up to the people without asking them if they actually wanted it. Somewhat like the man from whom you would not buy a used car leaving it the drive anyway then suing for payment.
But your point is a fair one. In the absence of DNA evidence, I cannot conclusively state which of the b*******s was conceived out of wedlock, so I withdraw. Perhaps, if their fathers had done the same thing . . . but that's another story.
Complain about this comment
#90:
What I could deduct from your wording is that the actual rules adopted by the EU institutions (EC & EP) under the supervision of Paris-Berlin-Brussels trio do not match the UK/England vision on how the Trade-Transport-Fiscal-Labour markets are to be freed even more for the common benefit of all member states? On the other hand you name all those petty officials with apparently little power as the people to be blamed for the decay, misery and disillusion within the EU which they seem to head down the same despicable route.
What I certainly cant understand is how it happens that ever since 1957 the EU is still the most attractive economic convention in Europe (and outside Europe). And how does work without falling apart this multilanguage, multinational and multicultural Babylon tower where even new comers like us Bulgarians feel free and happy to live and work?
Complain about this comment
#80, BernardVC,
Thanks for the information, I just found the PDF document CODE_ELECTORAL_1_AVRIL_2009 on the Belgium web site and it is written in both French and Dutch which means I don't have to take a crash course in Dutch, thankfully, and will continue to concentrate on my much more valuable French, and native English.
The document does confirm what you said and there is either a blank paper or a paper spoiled in a number of ways, such as voting at the top of a list and for a candidate in another list. In all cases it still doesn't give us the chance to register why we were dissatisfied, just that we chose not to support any candidate. The spoilt vote also contains both errors such as voting across lists and defaced papers, it is a pity that defaced papers are not counted separately as that would indicate discontent.
Complain about this comment
#102, ironfranco,
It is a shame that often the more decrepit a government becomes the larger its civil service also becomes and these civil 'servants' quickly learn the ropes and become jobsworthies. The only reason d'etre seems to be to protect their shiny rears, they quickly learn that endeavour rocks the boat and content themselves with gaining promotion by finding new obtrusive laws and/or regulations to inflict on the people they are allegedly serving. The EU establishments have quite evidently followed that route, just as the UK civil service has, and the dictatorial attitude regarding the badly and shoddily written Lisbon treaty/constitution is clear evidence of that.
The rot starts at the top and the legions of 'servants' just play the game they are allowed to, therefore I blame the incestuous and crony way the council of ministers and the commissioners are chosen as a prime root cause for the malaise we have now in the EU.
Complain about this comment
#104 Buzet23
If la raison detre (the reason for the existence) of all those EU officials seems to be the protection of their own shiny rears, and, if the rot starts at the top, what certainly is to be done is to start our intervention at home, by revising all national election systems in order to avoid the closed shop effect. Is this possible at this stage? Who is going to start the discussion? Who will follow?
Complain about this comment
In reply to comments made @ #100
"As for the Wiki Article. Look, Wiki is very good for factual research, but, you quoted an 'opinion' piece which is about as useful as mine or yours on any topic! The author of that piece was basing all they wrote on conjecture, pretty much like you have been doing on this Blog, thus, nothing of substance is proven!"
Then challenge it, if it's wrong and you can reference your corrections the article will then be correct...
But of course the anti EU propergandists won't will because they know that they can't go against the REFERENCED fatcs.
Complain about this comment
#103 - Buzet23
Personally, I have always thought that all ballot papers should have a "None of the Above" option. What is more, the NotAs should be declared along with all the other candidates. That way, everyone can protest, nobody has to abstain or spoil their vote and it is not impossible you would get a "plague on all your houses" vote. That ought to give them pause for thought.
Complain about this comment
Boilerplated wrote:
"In reply to comments made @ #100
"As for the Wiki Article. Look, Wiki is very good for factual research, but, you quoted an 'opinion' piece which is about as useful as mine or yours on any topic! The author of that piece was basing all they wrote on conjecture, pretty much like you have been doing on this Blog, thus, nothing of substance is proven!"
Then challenge it, if it's wrong and you can reference your corrections the article will then be correct...
But of course the anti EU propergandists won't will because they know that they can't go against the REFERENCED fatcs."
I should have thought the task of a good propaganda agent ("propergandist" is not a viable word. I suggest you abandon it at this early juncture, lest it attracts Americans.) would be precisely to go against referenced facts. By counter referencing them, I suppose.
You see, facts are much like potato crisps. You can salt them, pepper them, dust them with chili and so on. And you can reference them. But they are still potato crisps.
What you guys are talking about, these are not facts. They are conjectures regarding a theoretical model of a poorly understood and highly confidential political alliances. Going back to the crisps analogy, you are pouring salt on top of chili on top of pepper, and complaining about the crisps.
But I don't want to take the analogy any further. I don't have any special reason to suppose that a causal relationship exists between the incidence of the application of crisp condiments and the incidence of factual representations in the European political media. Nor do I feel, given the quality of words being thrown around this thread, that we can afford to stray too far from precisely what is meant by the bare words passed between us.
People who use words like "propergandists" are liable to do anything.
Complain about this comment
@103. Buzet23:
Usually the amount of ballots that were blanco (and even spoilt) can be determined. Afaik, you usually get the amount of valid votes made when the results are made public.
As for the best way for southern belgians to voice their disapproval with the current politicians... Simple: move north, learn dutch, become flemish. :-D More parties to vote for too.
Complain about this comment
#109
What a wonderful, ingenious, cheap and easy way to straighten the electoral system of Belgium! If I follow, I should go south, learn Turkish and become Muslim! (between 6 and 8 per cent of our votes go for the so called *Movement for the rights and the liberties*, dominated by Muslim readers). Sofia, May 19 2009.
Complain about this comment
#110, ironfranco,
I could not have put it better, I have no more wish for my grand daughters be forced to wear a burka that they be forced to learn an obsolete language like Dutch. BernardVC, as for moving North, it may surprise you but only a few days was enough, I will be very happy to stay in the pleasant South and as I've said before I am of English origin.
PS. The number of Blanc votes is published but that includes both blanc and nuls according to the PDF I referred to before.
Complain about this comment
Buzet23, @111. (in no way intent to interrupt the discussion, others pls just neglect) a burka is a sheep-skin grey long cloak without sleeves, more like a poncho without the front, clasped by a clasp at the neck in front. Never saw a Turkish person in a burka it's too hot there to wear those 10 kilos of fur-coat in curls. It's Georgia shepherd in winter in mountains in snow, Dagestan fighter in expedition, and well, any mountains in snow gentlemanly :o) outfit. Plus pre-Caucases at the foot of mountains living cossacks' patented attire. Not for girls, though. Way too heavy you'd collapse.
I understand you don't wish it as a dress for your grand-daughters LOL.
Complain about this comment
#113,
Alice you're as always right but it is also a women's garment, A burqa (also transliterated burkha, burka or burqua from Arabic: burqu) is an enveloping outer garment worn by women in some Islamic traditions for the purpose of cloaking the entire body. It is worn over the usual daily clothing (often a long dress or a shalwar kameez) and removed when the woman returns to the sanctuary of the household (see purdah).
LOL and keep up the good work.
Complain about this comment
And there was I think that a burka was someone who posted about something about which they know nothinga.
Complain about this comment
Alis-a then thinks there are 2 of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burka
"..put aside your deadly scythe, Death-babushka, for a while
oh nothing good is promised by this suspicious quiet sun-set dark
only sabre to a cossack in the steppe is girl-friend
only burka to a cossack in the steppe a wife!
Complain about this comment
#111 Buzet23
I certainly can not put blame neither on the Belgium or on the Bulgarian politicians. Both countries are in similar position. We have 90% Slavic orthodox and 10% minorities of which at least 6% Muslim; you have Flemish in the north and Valons in the south part of the kingdom. (In the old days I used to call many times at Antwerp as a sailor).
The mere fact that both countries exist without much trouble inside is just another proof that ethnos tolerance and democracy are two faces of the same coin.
Complain about this comment
#115 WebAlice
You better give me your private e-mail adress.
Thanks in advance
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS