Another Eu Perspective

[lindapalmara]

Just read a letter and this sums up my feeling about the EU. It's not about borders and rules, it's about Democracy.

http://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20160115/282660391420093/TextView

[Old_Geezer]

Oh it's about borders as well. And sovereignty. And imposed laws. It's a whole lot of things, democracy included.

[Old_Geezer]

If one believes it is only about democracy then one must be approving of one's country just being a single part of a large country called the EU, where each part has a different culture/opinion/way of looking at things. I don't wish different folk with viewpoints dictating how the country I am in is run. The EU is too big and diverse for comfort. It should be a trading block, not a single entity. Anyway the article doesn't state anything we weren't all already aware of. It's run by elites and the elected folk merely discuss what they're told. No real power.

[Gromit]

A lot of problems with that letter. I do not buy into the EU is undemocratic line.

We all elected our constituency Members of the European Parliament (MEP).
Commissioners, are servants of the MEPs and are appointed by them. They are tasked with formulating policy that the MEP then vote into law. They are in effect like select committees, who we also do not get to appoint.

When two thirds of the voting public do not bother to vote in the election, we should not complain that the public is not being properly represented.

[Old_Geezer]

Perhaps they don't vote because they aren't being properly represented. When your elected representatives do not decide the polices, and subjects to discuss, the whole thing is undemocratic, the elected being reduced to puppets doing the bidding of those who decide what the policies are.

[Gromit]

Old Geezer,

All EU Directives have to be voted into law by MEPs who are elected. The MEPs decide what is the broad policy. They then tell the Commissioners to draft a draft Policy. That is published for debate, and then amendments/changes to the Commissioners' proposals are debated and voted on by the MEPs.

[lindapalmara]

I beg your pardon OG I meant "it's not just about borders"

[Old_Geezer]

I don't intend to do a great 'drains up' on the EU as I did a decade or two ago; get bored with it all now. But IIRC the European Commission is the only part that can initiate legislation. Parliament just discuss and vote on whether the legislation will be passed this time.

[Gromit]

(Worth a watch) How the European Parliament works:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23465820

[lindapalmara]

//A lot of problems with that letter. I do not buy into the EU is undemocratic line. //

Gromit. You are saying that the Commission are the servants of the MEPs and they elect them. This is very native of you. Commissioners are "appointed" by whoever is in Government. Can you imagine anyone voting for Cathy Ashton, who has never been elected to anything in her life, Mandleson, Kinnock, Patten etc who were all failed politicians. The MEPs are whipped and they know if they don't toe the line they will have their snouts taken out of the troughs. The 'Retired' Commissioners know that if they speak against the EU they will lose their lucrative pensions. The likes of Mandleson went on to make a fortune from dodgy despots and Ogliarchs. Just like Blair

[Gromit]

OG

You don't think your MP dreams up Transport Acts or Benefit Acts themselves do you?

The appointed Minister (we do not appoint him/her) instructs an whole army of experts, bureaucrat, technicians and civil servants to knock something up that is workable, lawful and to their brief. That legislation is then voted on by ALL MPs.

The European Commissioners take on that function at the EU, but the MEP have the final say with their vote.

[Gromit]

The European President is elected by the MEPs.
The President then allocates the jobs for the 28 Commissioners (one from each member state).
The MEPs can and do vote against the Commissioners if what they present unacceptable.

[Svejk]

https://twitter.com/PowellPolitics/status/687593877419724800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[Khandro]

This week's Spectator outlines how Cameron hopes to scare you into going along with him, don't be fooled;

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/01/scary-monsters-david-cameron-will-invoke-the-threat-of-jihadis-russia-and-crime-to-win-an-eu-invote/

[Gromit]

Svejk

UKIP are paid £2million a year in MEP salaries alone.

[lindapalmara]

Brilliant Links Khandro and Svejk. Says it all really. Did you vote for your Commissioner Gromit? Or Junker? Incidentally there was a scandal breaking a year or so ago about his being heavily involved in allowing tax avoidance schemes to be set up in Luxenbourg during his time as President. It was said he thought this could break him then it went quiet. One of the great EU cover ups!

[lindapalmara]

//UKIP are paid £2million a year in MEP salaries alone//. Well divided by 24 it's par for the course. At least there is some opposition there. Incidentally do not vote UKIP.

[lindapalmara]

That last sentence should have been I do not vote UKIP. However I like agree with some of their comments on the EU.
Whst do you think about the EU finances not being signed off for goodness knows how many years Gromit?

[Gromit]

// Did you vote for your [our] Commissioner Gromit?

Nope. I doubt I would have given my vote to Baron Hill of Oareford (the current UK commissioner). He was appointed by the Prime Minister by virtue of the fact fact the Cameron won the General Election.

// What do you think about the EU finances not being signed off for goodness knows how many years Gromit? //

The EU accounts have been passed by the independent auditors every year since 2007 as "accurate, legal, regular and reliable". That is not to say expenditure has not been without material errors, they are. And the Auditors job is to highlight those errors. Last year the UK Government paid out £40 billion in benefits in error. That does not mean the UK accounts were not signed off. Likewise, EU expenditure is subject to mistakes, errors and fraud. But acknowledging that does not mean the accounts were not signed off.

[New Judge]

No you didn't, of course, because you can't vote for him or anybody else likely to have any influence in the EU.

I’m afraid, Gromit, that your notion that the EU is somehow “democratic” because (those of us who can be bothered) elect MEPs falls a little short of the mark. There is a huge democratic deficit in the workings of the EU. I gave quite a bit of detail on why I believe this to be so in a question a couple of months ago. I cannot find it at the present so I’ll do what I can to repeat it..

Firstly, there is quite a difference between how the EU works and how the UK government works. Despite your explanation, MEPs cannot propose legislation to the Parliament, they can only vote on measures proposed by the commission. Your comparison with Ministers in the UK Parliament is not appropriate. Ministers are MPs elected by voters and chosen for their jobs by the Prime Minister. Commissioners are not elected. Quite simply the two are not comparable.

Furthermore opposition MPs in Parliament usually make up around 40% to 45% of the House (currently it’s 49.2%). This means (despite the party Whips) comparatively few dissenters from the Government side have to be found for a vote to go against the government. In the EU Parliament UK MEPs amount to only 9.7%. This makes it virtually impossible for a measure with which the UK does not agree from being turned down by the EU. This is confirmed by the results of EU Parliamentary votes:

Between 2009 and 2014, 1936 votes were held in the European Parliament, and 576 of them were opposed by a majority of the UK’s 73 elected representatives. But of those, 485 were still passed – meaning the view of Britain being outvoted in 86 per cent of cases. This rises to 98 per cent in votes that cover budgets, and 92 per cent on constitutional and inter-institutional affairs. Measures that UK MEPs have been powerless to stop include the Financial Transaction Tax on share dealings and rules on short-selling. These have very little impact of the vast majority of the 28 nations but have a profound effect on the City of London. They should be matters for the UK Parliament and not influenced by representations from Romania, Bulgaria and other nations where financial transactions are comparatively minimal.

Then you need to consider representation. Britain has around ten per cent of the seats in Brussels, and is one of the most underrepresented by head of population, under a system designed to increase the clout of small nations. There is one MEP for every 880,000 British voters, compared to one for every 70,900 Maltese. The EU average is one MEP for 486,000 voters.

As the EU assumes more powers and its Parliament votes on an ever increasing range of topics this democratic deficit will become more profound. Quite simply, the EU is far too big and, more importantly, too diverse for a single piece of legislation to fit and suit 500m inhabitants. Couple this with the fact that most countries (except the UK) simply ignore any legislation that does not suit them and that most of the important policy is determined by Germany, it’s quite simply (as Mr Grayling suggests) a disaster for the UK.

[lindapalmara]

As a,ways NJ, very wise words!