The European council only get to nominate candidates they deem suitable to sit on the European commission and the European parliament (the people YOU voted for) get to accept or reject them. If the parliament aren't happy with a candidate then they don't get in, its as simple as that. So basically the heads of states (who have been voted in at general elections) nominate people which are then reviewed by parliament members (who have also been voted in by members of the public) and deem whether they are suitable for the commission or not. What part do you actually take issue with? And what part of the process isn't democratic?
I think the whole "dictated to by unelected officials" argument is wildly exaggerated. It's wheeled out constantly by the anti-Europe lobby without any real evidence to back it up. Like all those scare stories about ridiculously bureaucratic rules which surprisingly, under investigation, turn out to be entirely false. Anyway, I think I'd rather be dictated to by unelected European officials than by Boris ****ing Johnson. Boris - obviously a Russki anyway.
They don't have a column in the Mail alongside Hopkins and Littlejohn, ergo they're not 'democratic', innit?
So what you are saying is, the public have no choice in who gets selected to be the commissioner president and the council keep picking who they want until 1 gets voted in by all the MEPs of europe? So where do the public get to decide on who gets elected? Even HK has more democracy than the EU and those people were having a good old riot a couple of years ago. Then after the commissoner president gets to select 27 more of his best mates to chair the board. Would you be happy if we all voted labour in the local elections and then the labour party then put their leader on the stand and chose Nigel Farage, then Katie Hopkins, then Boris Johnson etc etc until 1 of them got voted in? Probably not which is exactly what can happen in this version of the EU (before they undoubtedly grab some more power).
Nope, they'll just take your money instead. At least people opt to pay money to hopkins inadvertently by buying the mail. You're just giving money to even more civil servants to have a jolly.
You elect people to make the decisions. That's the whole point of democracy, it wouldn't work if everybody had to vote on every single decision and appointment. Just like the public didn't vote Jeremy Hunt to be Health Secretary (or whatever the title is), people voted for David Cameron to make those decisions on who should be in his cabinet.
Saying daft things like that doesn't help your case at all. It's on a par with Diego equating the EU with the USSR. You do realise that MEP's are elected? Is the system radically different than the domestic one where we elect MP's but it's senior civil servants who have the greater long-term influence? Ultimately, it's big business and people like Murdoch who are the real power-brokers anyway. I'm not trying to be insulting, but I honestly think you're deluding yourself if you think there'll be any great benefit to the ordinary people from leaving.
You are absolutely correct that we shouldnt need to elect everyone. However we are talking about the people making our laws here, essentially the most powerful person in the eu once elected. Do you not think that such a person should be decided by the people rather than the elites?
Which part of that is untrue? The population vote in their equivalent of the mps in hong kong and then they vote in the leader. Anyone can run for chairman of Hong Kong as long as you are a hk resident and +40 years old. For eu commisioner you must get your mates to put you forward
They cannot pass the laws, so they really aren't the most powerful people in the EU. The parliament can also make amendments to any laws they attempt to pass and I've read that 50% of amendments get accepted, which is significantly higher than most national parliaments in the EU, so the MEPs we have elected do have quite a huge say in what goes on. Plus, the main problem is, how the hell are you going to orchestrate one single election over 28 countries? Not possible. The Brexiters would also complain that its costing them money to fly every single candidate to all 28 members of the EU.
They are the only people who can make the laws. As for amendments its only if the commission accepts them. If the lawmakers arent the most powerful people who can propose the laws they want which override national laws then who is the most powerful person?
The two positions aren't the same. You're equating a political position with an administrative one.The structure may be slightly different, but still the administrative positions in our own country are unelected, and necessarily so. How would the general public be qualified to judge on the suitability of someone to run a government department or a health authority or whatever? The civil service remains though ministers come and go. EU commissioners are appointed by the elected officials, and are answerable to parliament, there isn't as much of a difference as is made out. Democracy is an illusion anyway. How often do we ever have a clear majority government? This means that most of the people are disenfranchised for most of the time. True democracy is impracticable so we just have to make the best of what we can. Incidentally, in your opinion - what are these terrible atrocities that have been imposed on the UK by the EU against our will? Most of the pan-European directives are related to health and food standards, human rights etc and are things you'd expect all civilised societies to adopt anyway.
I agree democracy is an illusion. However its better to have it in our form than lets say russia would you not agree? So are you saying theres a group behind the commissioners that are actually proposing the laws and the commissioners that just put them forward? What has the eu done thats really bad? Nothing yet. I think its just a beauracracy machine which is there to take more money out of the system. I do find it odd how the eu wants an army though. Until there are no borders across the eu and theres no france germany england a collective eu
I am still undecided on this. I am however very disappointed that the options are "in, out" where is the "shake it all about" option for us Hoki Koki supporters.
That's the theory but reality is different. That decisions are made by the people in countries like the UK is an illusion. Multinationals pay huge amounts to lobby MPs and affect legislation. Why do you think MPs delayed taking action against tobacco companies?
please log in to view this image Control???. What about people in employment because of EU?,.Are they going to keep their jobs if Britain leaves???
Every time the Brexiters are crushed by the weight of economic argument for not leaving, the cry comes back "What do the experts know - they didn't foresee the 2008 crash?", so let's ask an expert who did predict the 2008 crash what he thinks: http://www.theguardian.com/small-business-network/2016/may/13/brexit-myth--less-red-tape-small-firms
