For those Pro European Union and integration

Mec27

How would you reform the EU, if at all?

Based on my limited knowledge, I think the EU is somewhat in limbo as of now. We either need full on integration or just disband the whole thing.

A parliament that can initiate and repeal legislation.

Bass Reeves

Mec27 wrote: »

How would you reform the EU, if at all?

Based on my limited knowledge, I think the EU is somewhat in limbo as of now. We either need full on integration or just disband the whole thing.

OP usually when there are only 1-2 posts i do not quote an original post. However you have limited your options to two. What we need is a Federal type system. What is a Federal system. This is where there is an overarching body that is either limited in power or else that states have the ability to accept or reject it proposals.

The problem with the EU is that there seems to be a disconnect between policy maker's and citizens. This is because citizens feel that there is a top down government. In Ireland we seem to enforce EU legislation faster that some other countries in regards to health and safety( examples Spain and France) in regards to workers rights ( example the UK). As well some countries seem to have a veto on legislation, Germany and France. If you look at the way Ireland and Greece were treated during the banking collapse compared to Spain and Italy. As well during monetary union Germany and Greece were allowed to enter without meeting the actual criteria.

You have other issue regarding conscience and moral issue. In a federal system these are left up to individual states again this policy seem to be driven by unelected administrators. Whether these are fair assumptions or not this is the perception by citizens. This is where the Brexit issue is coming from.

FreudianSlippers

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

A parliament that can initiate and repeal legislation.

So you would be for full integration and neutering of individual legislatures having control of how to implement directives?

I'd be pro-EU, but that's way too far IMO.

FreudianSlippers

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

So you would be for full integration and neutering of individual legislatures having control of how to implement directives?

I'm in favour of full political, monetary and economic integration, yes.

However, nothing in my suggestion necessitates that.

You are aware that directives are legislation, right? And that my suggestion merely involves granting an extant capacity to initiate & repeal legislation to an additional institution, i.e. the EP.

FreudianSlippers

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

So you would be for full integration and neutering of individual legislatures having control of how to implement directives?

I'm in favour of full political, monetary and economic integration, yes.

However, nothing in my suggestion necessitates that.

You are aware that directives are legislation, right? And that my suggestion merely involves granting an extant capacity to initiate & repeal legislation to an additional institution, i.e. the EP.

Directives are legislation in terms of the fact that they're legislative acts, sure...
But you are aware that they are not directly effective, right?

You may have missed that day in law school where they explained the difference between Regulations and Directives, IIRC it was the first day of EU law.

FreudianSlippers

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Directives are legislation in terms of the fact that they're legislative acts, sure...
But you are aware that they are not directly effective, right?

You may have missed that day in law school where they explained the difference between Regulations and Directives, IIRC it was the first day of EU law.

What's the lack of direct effect got to do with my point??

Presently, directives initiated by the Commission tend not to have direct effect. It doesn't diminish their status as European legislation.

I want the EP to have that power, as well as the power to repeal. Like every other parliament.

What are you actually on about? Seriously.

micosoft

Mec27 wrote: »

How would you reform the EU, if at all?

Based on my limited knowledge, I think the EU is somewhat in limbo as of now. We either need full on integration or just disband the whole thing.

Two fallacies here.

The first is that peoples opinion of how they think the EU should be run masquerades as that totally abused word "reform". Just because you prefix an opinion with the word "reform" does not make it better than the existing situation. The proposed "reforms" of most of the brexiters for example are simply to roll back protections for the environment, employment etc and would not be regarded as a reform anymore than bringing back workhouses would be reforming the welfare system. The vast majority of reasons why the EU conducts the business the way it does tends to have good reasons to do with an union of 28 countries. Unfortunately the media does a (deliberately?) terrible job of explaining why.

That brings me to your second fallacy. It's not an either or decision. By your own admittance you have limited knowledge. The vast majority of countries are happy with the situation that the EU looks after things it makes sense on a pan European level and leave things that don't with national governments. Framing it in an absolutest everything or nothing is not acceptable to the vast majority of Europeans. Both solutions make the situation worse in every conceivable way. There are many many options in between if you want to research it and put a reasoned proposal together. Contrary to popular media opinion there are plenty of ways to democratically bring such reasons forward to the EU the simplest of which is your MEP.

micosoft

Bass Reeves wrote: »

OP usually when there are only 1-2 posts i do not quote an original post. However you have limited your options to two. What we need is a Federal type system. What is a Federal system. This is where there is an overarching body that is either limited in power or else that states have the ability to accept or reject it proposals.

The EU vastly less powerful than any federal political system. A federal system would have a single foreign affairs, military etc. You might want to check your understanding of what a federal system is - the US, Brazil, Russia, Germany are all federations.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

The problem with the EU is that there seems to be a disconnect between policy maker's and citizens. This is because citizens feel that there is a top down government.

Same as the US I guess. Why do some citizens feel that way? Generally the current style of face free populist opposition.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

In Ireland we seem to enforce EU legislation faster that some other countries in regards to health and safety( examples Spain and France) in regards to workers rights ( example the UK).

Feel free to campaign for lower health and safety legislation and workers right if that is your political leaning.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

As well some countries seem to have a veto on legislation, Germany and France.

No more than ANY other EU member.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

If you look at the way Ireland and Greece were treated during the banking collapse compared to Spain and Italy.

As far as I recall only Ireland and Greece went totally bust... we were the ones going cap in hand asking for bailouts because the electorate drove our respective economies into the ground (As we may do again).

Bass Reeves wrote: »

As well during monetary union Germany and Greece were allowed to enter without meeting the actual criteria.

The Greeks fraudulent statistics are well known. WRT Germany it was due to them still absorbing East Germany - an extraordinary investment of trillions of DM. It was a one time debt to GDP event that was well understood at the time hence the pass they got. Is Germany's economic performance dragging down the Euro?

Bass Reeves wrote: »

You have other issue regarding conscience and moral issue. In a federal system these are left up to individual states again this policy seem to be driven by unelected administrators. Whether these are fair assumptions or not this is the perception by citizens. This is where the Brexit issue is coming from.

Simply untrue as the current abortion debate in the US demonstrates. Most of what you regard as conscience and moral issues are from the European Court of Human Rights which has nothing to do with EU membership and is not a agency of the EU. It was pushed on Europe by the British post WW2 as the punchline to this video demonstrates. The Brexit issue is coming from a fact free position.

All in all I'm not sure if you know what a Federal System is and certainly do not agree it would be an improvement given it is against the desire of the vast majority of EU citizens.

Bass Reeves

micosoft wrote: »

The EU vastly less powerful than any federal political system. A federal system would have a single foreign affairs, military etc. You might want to check your understanding of what a federal system is - the US, Brazil, Russia, Germany are all federations.


Same as the US I guess. Why do some citizens feel that way? Generally the current style of face free populist opposition.


Feel free to campaign for lower health and safety legislation and workers right if that is your political leaning.


No more than ANY other EU member.


As far as I recall only Ireland and Greece went totally bust... we were the ones going cap in hand asking for bailouts because the electorate drove our respective economies into the ground (As we may do again).


The Greeks fraudulent statistics are well known. WRT Germany it was due to them still absorbing East Germany - an extraordinary investment of trillions of DM. It was a one time debt to GDP event that was well understood at the time hence the pass they got. Is Germany's economic performance dragging down the Euro?


Simply untrue as the current abortion debate in the US demonstrates. Most of what you regard as conscience and moral issues are from the European Court of Human Rights which has nothing to do with EU membership and is not a agency of the EU. It was pushed on Europe by the British post WW2 as the punchline to this video demonstrates. The Brexit issue is coming from a fact free position.

All in all I'm not sure if you know what a Federal System is and certainly do not agree it would be an improvement given it is against the desire of the vast majority of EU citizens.

I always find that those that split a post up into partial posts and then only address the debate in single issues seem to have an inability to debate an overall issue. They also seem to presume that they are more intelligent and understanding of the issue involved. In general these are people that work in administration where dealing with issue in a singular form have an advantage.

However this is now what is at the nub of the issue in Europe and in Ireland. No overall vision. Your post is full of fallacy as you do not deal with the issue as a singular problem. This is why the EU has created the Brexit monster. People who debate like you only deal in single issue at the time and then do not add anything to the debate

I will take you dealing with health and safety

Feel free to campaign for lower health and safety legislation and workers right if that is your political leaning.

You have neither debated the point nor understood the issue but rather assumed that you are more intelligent than me and also made assumption regardimg my political leanings.

Health and Safety legislation is a monster and is a direct attack on workers. You may ask why. due to over regulation and it is not just in H&S it has made it impossible for small employers to deal with the cost of this and debarrs them for bidding for contracts. Along with building regulation it had wiped out small builders. And yet most serious building issue was with larger firms. But you superior intelligence ignores this.

Recently a lad siad to me me there is ''one thing about common sense it is not that common''.


This is where the EU is failing there is a massive disconnect between ordinary people and the institutions involved. Some of this is related to the way national politicians use the EU to blame it for issues regarding leislation. However there is a failure in the EU to address this issue by correcting the record.

The recent water issue is a case in point and the present Bin debacle. The EU policy is unclear and the EU has done nothing to clear it up. The impact that the EU has had on Energy and telecoms in this country has caused a distortion that has in the case of telecoms made us the worse in Europe and in the case of energy has caused us to go from the cheapest in Europe to the most expensive all in the name of competition.

On the other hand ( the Eu is not all bad) we have seen Ryanair revolutionize air trave to the benifit of us an island state. It attempt to force the deregulation of transport (busses and trains) if it worksd may well take us out of our cars but we haver to wait and see.

However the EU has to be more clear in its regulation and to bring states to task that eith over or under implement EU based legislation.

You understanding of the impact of the Euro iis flawed. It is immaterial Of what germany was going through the regulation were bent to allow iot to access the Euro and along came greece. However the euro was flawed and still is though it is mainly by the control ceeded to Germany and the failure to have a real central bank structure.

More than Ireland and greece went bust but both of these countrt were made an example of to put manners on the other PIIGS. However the underlying issue in Italy, Spain and portagul are still there. As well by bankrupting Ireland it hid issue especially in France. We are not out of the woods uet regarding these issues.

Is germany dragging the euro down. It is ahard question. On straigh economic data no but the inability of german consumers to spend means that credit is cheap elsewhere. Remember we still have the lowest interest rates ever. Technically the Eu is still in a virtual recession interest rates tell us that. On interest rates in Ireland we still suffering because of the2007-2013 crash. We are paying 2-5% more for borrowing than elsewhere in Europe.

On Federal systems they are not limited by those that are already in existance. However most that want greater EU integrattion are unwiling to accept the Forign affairs and military element. It is the failure of a united front against Putin and against terrorism that again is leading to Brexit. Again we say Germany influence that during the Syrian crisis Angela Merkel was will to allow uncontrolled acces as it was to Germany advantage due to population age issues.

You see Microsoft the Eu is like and not like a computer. it is like it in it is dealing with many item all at once but it is unlike the modern complex processors that can sppedily deal with multiple tasks efficiently. The Eu is like a computer that has the orginal Windowns 3.0 that has being given the new platforms that madern computers deal with with out the complex processors and it is crashing because of that.

micosoft

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I always find that those that split a post up into partial posts and then only address the debate in single issues seem to have an inability to debate an overall issue. They also seem to presume that they are more intelligent and understanding of the issue involved. In general these are people that work in administration where dealing with issue in a singular form have an advantage.

Is that a long winded way of saying that you have no answer to my point by point rebuttal of your fact free diatribe on the EU?

Bass Reeves wrote: »

However this is now what is at the nub of the issue in Europe and in Ireland. No overall vision. Your post is full of fallacy as you do not deal with the issue as a singular problem. This is why the EU has created the Brexit monster. People who debate like you only deal in single issue at the time and then do not add anything to the debate

David Cameron created the Brexit monster. Those on the leave side such as yourself have moved on from the "inconvenient facts" to speaking in generalities because debating the facts hasn't worked out too well so far. Like Gove you are sick of experts with their pesky "facts".

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I will take you dealing with health and safety

Feel free to campaign for lower health and safety legislation and workers right if that is your political leaning.

You have neither debated the point nor understood the issue but rather assumed that you are more intelligent than me and also made assumption regardimg my political leanings.

Health and Safety legislation is a monster and is a direct attack on workers. You may ask why. due to over regulation and it is not just in H&S it has made it impossible for small employers to deal with the cost of this and debarrs them for bidding for contracts. Along with building regulation it had wiped out small builders. And yet most serious building issue was with larger firms. But you superior intelligence ignores this.

Recently a lad siad to me me there is ''one thing about common sense it is not that common''.

You seem to have some chip on your shoulder regarding your intelligence. You've stated your political leaning by saying you want less regulation on building regulations. That is a political standpoint. As I said you are free to suggest & lobby that we should lower Health and Safety regulations for small builders if that's what you want. You should accept the democratic opinion of others who are happy to see these regulations enforced - especially those that have seen the outcome of poor safety on construction/farm sites.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

This is where the EU is failing there is a massive disconnect between ordinary people and the institutions involved. Some of this is related to the way national politicians use the EU to blame it for issues regarding leislation. However there is a failure in the EU to address this issue by correcting the record.

When a constant stream of disinformation is presented as fact (such as happens on this site) it may not be possible for the EU to individually reply. Perhaps it should be incumbent on an active electorate to find out if "facts" they have been given are really true. And that debaters don't debate on their own "facts" supported by anecdote.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

The recent water issue is a case in point and the present Bin debacle. The EU policy is unclear and the EU has done nothing to clear it up. The impact that the EU has had on Energy and telecoms in this country has caused a distortion that has in the case of telecoms made us the worse in Europe and in the case of energy has caused us to go from the cheapest in Europe to the most expensive all in the name of competition.

On the other hand ( the Eu is not all bad) we have seen Ryanair revolutionize air trave to the benifit of us an island state. It attempt to force the deregulation of transport (busses and trains) if it worksd may well take us out of our cars but we haver to wait and see.

That's an opinion. The alternative viewpoint is that the Irish Government alone made a mess of deregulation by listening to too many vested interests. I'm not sure how you can lay the blame on the EU doorstep when it's clear it was successful for air travel. But that's a debate for another thread.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

However the EU has to be more clear in its regulation and to bring states to task that eith over or under implement EU based legislation.

Regulations are pretty clear to me. It makes sense that National Government apply them based on local needs. The EU does bring Governments to task as witnessed by the fines levied on Ireland on our failure to protect our raised bogs. It seems the EU is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't by some.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

You understanding of the impact of the Euro iis flawed. It is immaterial Of what germany was going through the regulation were bent to allow iot to access the Euro and along came greece. However the euro was flawed and still is though it is mainly by the control ceeded to Germany and the failure to have a real central bank structure.

Well the merging of two countries was considered a material fact. What were you saying about common sense earlier?

Bass Reeves wrote: »

More than Ireland and greece went bust but both of these countrt were made an example of to put manners on the other PIIGS. However the underlying issue in Italy, Spain and portagul are still there. As well by bankrupting Ireland it hid issue especially in France. We are not out of the woods uet regarding these issues.

Made examples of by given massive low interest loans to prevent collapse and tide them over from the taxpayers of other EU countries including poorer ones such as Slovenia? Last time I checked Ireland was not bankrupt and paying its debt down.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Is germany dragging the euro down. It is ahard question. On straigh economic data no but the inability of german consumers to spend means that credit is cheap elsewhere. Remember we still have the lowest interest rates ever. Technically the Eu is still in a virtual recession interest rates tell us that. On interest rates in Ireland we still suffering because of the2007-2013 crash. We are paying 2-5% more for borrowing than elsewhere in Europe.

All Untrue. I'm bemused by your "non straight economic data" view but Germany is not dragging the Eurozone down. Interest rates do no tell us whether we are in recession or not - a fall in GDP does. The Eurozone has not been in technical recession since Q2 2013. Irish Bond rates are lower than many other EU states including the UK.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

On Federal systems they are not limited by those that are already in existance. However most that want greater EU integrattion are unwiling to accept the Forign affairs and military element. It is the failure of a united front against Putin and against terrorism that again is leading to Brexit. Again we say Germany influence that during the Syrian crisis Angela Merkel was will to allow uncontrolled acces as it was to Germany advantage due to population age issues.

Right - you want a non-federal federal system. Even when presented with a clear-cut example of where you have completely misunderstood a term you still continue to try and bend the meaning to something which it is not. You could have simply said you meant "confederation" which (tenuously) could, but instead insist you want a federal system that does not act like a federal system.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

You see Microsoft the Eu is like and not like a computer. it is like it in it is dealing with many item all at once but it is unlike the modern complex processors that can sppedily deal with multiple tasks efficiently. The Eu is like a computer that has the orginal Windowns 3.0 that has being given the new platforms that madern computers deal with with out the complex processors and it is crashing because of that.

I'm really not sure how I can respond to that but I think you are making the old "unless everything is perfect let's tear it down". The reality is that the EU, warts and all is better then any alternative put forward (much like democracy). A union of 28 countries with many different views is never going to be perfect. But it's a lot better then 28 countries without a union as history has demonstrated.

RDM_83 again

micosoft wrote: »

David Cameron created the Brexit monster.

While I don't like the result and a lot of the campaigning that happened on both sides its disingenuous to say that David Cameron created the Brexit monster.

Yes he initiated the plans for a referendum to quell a loss of support and infighting within his party but like it or not this was because there was a very significant proportion of the population that held anti-EU feelings.

People talk about the stupid and insular English but if they held an EU referendum tomorrow in France it would likely be a Leave vote too.
Is allowing people a direct vote really something that we should be repelled by? Its this elitist notion that feeds into disconnect people have with the EU (and to a slightly lesser extent their own national politicians).

I can't give structural or detailed ways the EU could be reformed however there is ways that it could change.

1) There is value in having technocrats and experts, however the EU is to some extent a creation and home of these people (under its former guises it was an open technocracy), it needs to move away from this.

2) recognize that member states are not going to always have the same interests and fears, with the ascension of much of Eastern Europe we have a significant power block who have historic concerns and experiences very different to the core of the EU (the Soviets/Russians). Don't even bother trying to form a common military/defensive policy. Try to find a consensus based foreign policy

3) Curtail the power of Germany or any other disproportionately powerful country, allow them to exercise their power but design it that they have to do so outside an EU framework and if they do so it is their sole responsibility to deal with the aftermath. A lot of this present crisis is simply to do with one politicians solo run (Merkel), look at how her promises to Turkey needed to shore up her mistakes helped knock the UK out of the EU.

4) Reform the commision

5) Secure non-EU borders, if a popular poll was taken this would be a very popular position, yes it would be a high cost but I think it would be accepted and would comparable to other expenditures.

6) Recognize the huge differences in Purchasing Power Parity have a negative impact on the EU

Suryavarman

Allow the European Parliament to initiate or repeal legislation.

Either abolish the Euro or have increased fiscal integration i.e. giving the EU increased revenue raising capabilities and increased spending capabilities.

Even in the past when I've opposed increased integration I have favoured having an EU army. The economies of scale that could be achieved by diverting all EU defence spending into one single army could be great. It could allow less money to be spent of defence whilst making the EU safer.

I'd prefer the EU to focus more on making it easier to conduct business across the EU and less on superfluous, micro-management regulations. More SEPA and abolishing roaming charges, less banning lightbulbs and forcing websites to tell you that they use cookies.

I'd like to see laws reviewed after a few years and a cost-benefit analysis conducted on them (although I'd like to see this at all levels of government). If the cost outweigh the benefits then the laws should be repealed.

Sam Russell

Increase subsidiarity.

Reduce the requirement for privatisation. The ESB was forced to increase prices (because they were non-profit so that 'competition' could be introduced to lower prices. [Perhaps this is canard]

Make commissioners be elected by some mechanism.