Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Blair for EU presidency?
Options
Comments
-
the alternative is a US style presidential election
which is not very democratic thanks to the electoral college system (ahem ahem Bush & Florida) and since EU is not a federal state with centralized control and large presidential power like the US
anyways your whole post is based on wrong premise, since Herman Van Rompuy is no a "leader" (why the obsession with czars/king/dictator strongmen holding power?) but a chairman whose role is to coordinate work of others not rule from the top
the EU system is probably the most democratic system the world has known, be happy and proud of it, but its not without its weaknesses mainly due to the huge amounts of compromises in place to keep everyone happy
Democratic? You having a laugh surely. At least in the united states people get a say in who they elect even if the electoral system over there has its flaws.
These apparent unknowns are now bascially representing 360 million people and speaking for them. The average joe soap in europe has no clue who these 2 people are, never got a say in wheither they wanted to vote for them. The entire system is corrupt. The whole nwo thing seemed farcical until you actually start to see elements of it unfold before your very eyes. These people have bought and paid off entire government representatives in europe and our own government have no doubt to gain what they really want which is total control. Who is that woman? Apparently a former baroness in the u.k with next to no political experience whom nobody ever heard of. These are the people really pulling the strings of the governments. Large coroporations and ultra wealthy royalists. Have no doubt about that. The goverment here and elsewhere have long long been paid off. Just like we seen the other night with france ireland the corporations are running the show.
This is very very worrisome and just like i predicted after they bullied the irish people into voting for lisbon the true agenda is now being seen by all.
I doubt the average minister in ireland or elsewhere even knows who these people are. Whats scarey about all this is that we are seeing no greater democracy but the actual death of it. The introduction of the national id card yesterday in britain points to where all this is really going.0 -
the alternative is a US style presidential election
which is not very democratic thanks to the electoral college system (ahem ahem Bush & Florida) and since EU is not a federal state with centralized control and large presidential power like the US
anyways your whole post is based on wrong premise, since Herman Van Rompuy is no a "leader" (why the obsession with czars/king/dictator strongmen holding power?) but a chairman whose role is to coordinate work of others not rule from the top
the EU system is probably the most democratic system the world has known, be happy and proud of it, but its not without its weaknesses mainly due to the huge amounts of compromises in place to keep everyone happy
I actually laughed out loud and had to re read your last paragraph where you claim the EU system is "probably" the most democratic system the world has known. I am reminded that the Soviet Union used also to make similar claims, and how someone can claim that a political stitch up (as we've just had to appoint our president of the council and EU High Representative), is more democratic than countries where their presidents are elected by actual elections, seems uncertain.0 -
ConsiderThis wrote: »(as we've just had to appoint our president of the council and EU High Representative), is more democratic than countries where their presidents are elected by actual elections, seems uncertain.
You do realise that there is a difference between the job of Herman Van Rompuy and Barack Obama, right?
The actual decisions of the EU are made by the elected heads of governments of each member country, not by the President of the European Council. Why would I want or need to vote for someone to fill that position, it has very little power other than chairing and organising meetings and the occasional meeting with another head of government. Better that than 27 heads of government flying out to have a chat with other leaders. Van Rompuy has no authority on decisions other than those which the members of the council tell him to make.
Obama has ultimate authority in his position. He makes the final decisions.
And to even try to compare Obama's position with Van Rompuy is dishonest and misleading at the very least.
I think you have misrepresented ei.sdraob's post. My reading of it was that the EU system, whereby a council of 27 people make all the big decisions is more democratic than the US system where, ultimatly, one person does it.0 -
You do realise that there is a difference between the job of Herman Van Rompuy and Barack Obama, right?
The actual decisions of the EU are made by the elected heads of governments of each member country, not by the President of the European Council. Why would I want or need to vote for someone to fill that position, it has very little power other than chairing and organising meetings and the occasional meeting with another head of government. Better that than 27 heads of government flying out to have a chat with other leaders. Van Rompuy has no authority on decisions other than those which the members of the council tell him to make.
Obama has ultimate authority in his position. He makes the final decisions.
And to even try to compare Obama's position with Van Rompuy is dishonest and misleading at the very least.
I think you have misrepresented ei.sdraob's post. My reading of it was that the EU system, whereby a council of 27 people make all the big decisions is more democratic than the US system where, ultimatly, one person does it.
I didn't mention Obama!0 -
ConsiderThis wrote: »I didn't mention Obama!
You're right, you didn't. You mentioned "than countries where their presidents are elected by actual elections, seems uncertain."
I made the jump from 'president' to Obama. I presume then that you refered to a figurehead president like McAleese?
In which case, apologies, I got carried away. However I still don't believe its a fair comparison to compare even a figurehead president to Van Rumpoy as their jobs are still miles apart. Van Rumpoy is elected by the Council to, effectivly, run the council.
The benefit of having McAleese elected by the people is that part of her job is to sign bills into law and to decide whether to kick it on to the courts to have it constitutionality assessed. Which is a very important part of a democracy. Van Rumpoy won't have that sort of responsibility. And I also question the entire concept of Van Rumpoy being 'our president', although the media isn't and won't help matters by continuely refering to him as 'EU President' and 'Our President' (I'm looking at you, Sky News!). He looks after and represents the decisions and authority European Council, not a whole lot more.0 -
Advertisement
-
You're right, you didn't. You mentioned "than countries where their presidents are elected by actual elections, seems uncertain."
I made the jump from 'president' to Obama. I presume then that you refered to a figurehead president like McAleese?
In which case, apologies, I got carried away. However I still don't believe its a fair comparison to compare even a figurehead president to Van Rumpoy as their jobs are still miles apart. Van Rumpoy is elected by the Council to, effectivly, run the council.
The benefit of having McAleese elected by the people is that part of her job is to sign bills into law and to decide whether to kick it on to the courts to have it constitutionality assessed. Which is a very important part of a democracy. Van Rumpoy won't have that sort of responsibility. And I also question the entire concept of Van Rumpoy being 'our president', although the media isn't and won't help matters by continuely refering to him as 'EU President' and 'Our President' (I'm looking at you, Sky News!). He looks after and represents the decisions and authority European Council, not a whole lot more.
What I was thinking of was the two types of head of state; those like The Queen , or our President who are titular heads of state with little or no actual power, and executive heads of state (American president, Zimbabwean president, RSA President, who have considerable power.
The EU President of the Council seems to fall in between two stools, as it were. The office appears to have executive powers to act on behalf of the EU on the international stage, but also he is not head, or president, of the EU.
Having said that, the role will, as all roles do, change over time. In the hands of a skilful political operator like, for example, Blair, there is little doubt that he would have strutted the world stage, probably presenting himself as president of Europe, or even referring to himself as "the President". I suppose what will be interesting will be to watch the role over the coming years and see what it becomes.
What made me laugh about the other post was the claim that the EU "...the most democratic system the world has known..." which seems quite a claim, especially after the denial of referendums to all the people in 26 out of 27 countries over the important Lisbon treaty, and the fact that the politicians, who are the only people we can vote for at a european level, are not even allowed to initiate legislation!0 -
ConsiderThis wrote: »What I was thinking of was the two types of head of state; those like The Queen , or our President who are titular heads of state with little or no actual power, and executive heads of state (American president, Zimbabwean president, RSA President, who have considerable power.
The EU President of the Council seems to fall in between two stools, as it were. The office appears to have executive powers to act on behalf of the EU on the international stage, but also he is not head, or president, of the EU.
I see where you're coming from, but I'd disagree. It has far far less power than an executive head of state like Obama. But it also has a bit less power than McAleese who can ask the courts to examine legislation and must sign it into law. Pres. of the Council can't do anything like that. The only thing he can do is what the Council members strictly allow him to do. He will represent the views of the Council abroad, not his own. Thats not really a whole lot of power.ConsiderThis wrote: »Having said that, the role will, as all roles do, change over time. In the hands of a skilful political operator like, for example, Blair, there is little doubt that he would have strutted the world stage, probably presenting himself as president of Europe, or even referring to himself as "the President". I suppose what will be interesting will be to watch the role over the coming years and see what it becomes.
The Council members seem to have made their views clear as to what they want in a council president. They want someone who will run the council and run it well, who will assist them in reaching consensus and who will make the EU look dignified on the world stage. I can't see members of the council deciding in 2.5 years that they'd rather have an outspoken and controversial President who might only make trouble for them.ConsiderThis wrote: »What made me laugh about the other post was the claim that the EU "...the most democratic system the world has known..." which seems quite a claim, especially after the denial of referendums to all the people in 26 out of 27 countries over the important Lisbon treaty,
That has nothing to do with the EU. Thats down to each countries, leaders, parliments and constitutions.ConsiderThis wrote: »and the fact that the politicians, who are the only people we can vote for at a european level, are not even allowed to initiate legislation!
Well the citizens initiative might help this a bit by forcing the Commission to discuss an idea. If it is a good idea, then I don't think the Commission would mind initiating legislation on it. I'm not entirely convinced that allowing the Parliment to initiate legislation would be all that good an idea. It just seems 'messy' or something. And for the moment I'm happy enough for them to keep an eye on what the Commission is doing and vote on any legislation.0 -
realismpol wrote: »Democratic? You having a laugh surely. At least in the united states people get a say in who they elect even if the electoral system over there has its flaws.
These apparent unknowns are now bascially representing 360 million people and speaking for them. The average joe soap in europe has no clue who these 2 people are, never got a say in wheither they wanted to vote for them. The entire system is corrupt. The whole nwo thing seemed farcical until you actually start to see elements of it unfold before your very eyes. These people have bought and paid off entire government representatives in europe and our own government have no doubt to gain what they really want which is total control. Who is that woman? Apparently a former baroness in the u.k with next to no political experience whom nobody ever heard of. These are the people really pulling the strings of the governments. Large coroporations and ultra wealthy royalists. Have no doubt about that. The goverment here and elsewhere have long long been paid off. Just like we seen the other night with france ireland the corporations are running the show.
Why exactly would you want to vote for someone in a position that has exactly Zero executive powers?? I'd imagine the voter turnout would be pathetically low. This is how representative democracy works...you don't get to elect the Taoiseach or the Minister for Forgeign Affairs in this country. The power in the EU has always been and will remain with the European Council not some figurehead. Nothing in Lisbon changes that fact.realismpol wrote: »This is very very worrisome and just like i predicted after they bullied the irish people into voting for lisbon the true agenda is now being seen by all.
And what would that be? They appointed a President of the Council and Foreign Representative....nothing sinister here....this stuff was actually in the Treaty!realismpol wrote: »I doubt the average minister in ireland or elsewhere even knows who these people are. Whats scarey about all this is that we are seeing no greater democracy but the actual death of it. The introduction of the national id card yesterday in britain points to where all this is really going.
I'd imagine that Sarkozy and Merkel etc. wouldn't want a strong personality in these positions such as Blair as it would overshadow themselves. BTW how the President of the Council was appointed on Thursday is infinitely more democratic than the system that has been there previously.0 -
Van Rumpoy won't have that sort of responsibility. And I also question the entire concept of Van Rumpoy being 'our president', although the media isn't and won't help matters by continuely refering to him as 'EU President' and 'Our President' (I'm looking at you, Sky News!). He looks after and represents the decisions and authority European Council, not a whole lot more.
The role would appear to be shaping up more as the "Speaker" of the European Council than as the fantastical "EU President" dreamed up by the English media. As such, just like his comparable "Speaker" in the European Parliament - i.e. the President of the European Parliament - the role involves moving the agenda along (i.e. driving business) and politically representing the institution, just as Parliamentary Speakers do world-wide on a regular basis.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
I think that Andrew Neil of the BBC This Week programme was correct at the start, in his assumption that the most insignifant person (he even mentioned Rompuy)would get the job. Had some high profile person like Blair been chosen, they would have been looking for more power than the job originally entailed. This would have gradually happened aftert a long-drawn out slanging match.
As was also predicted, the final outcome was a Franco-German stitch-up.
The funniest part of the fiasco was that Gordon Brown, even though he knew that Tony Blair was definitely not going to get the job, continued to canvas for him. I think that he did this, knowing that Tony Blair would scuttle away red-faced with his tail between his legs after Rompuy got it.
We'll see soon enough whether or not Merkel and Sarkozy made the right decision, or whether they've shot themselves in the feet.0 -
why are they paying 350,000 a year for just a speaker, no wonder people are talking about waste in eu politics
Speakers are regarded as being very senior posts in most democracies. Very few states would take the view that someone is "just a speaker". If anything, the role of Ceann Comhairle is considerable downplayed in Ireland which is a bit odd.
As for the salary you mention, I have no idea about it. The source -from a Google search - appears to be Open Europe, which based on past performance are about as reliable for objective analysis of EU affairs as the North Korean news is for stock market analysis.
Then again maybe it goes back to the days when Bertie Ahern was being touted as a potential President. They might have heard what our Taoisigh earn and decided to top it!0
Advertisement