Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

The EU absolutely will not start dictating the UK's domestic constitutional arrangements. They won't touch that with a barge-pole.

The EU can, and does, require candidate states (and member states) to have anti-corruption mechanisms in place. But the arrangement which the UK had in place as a member state were compliant with EU law, and those arrangements are still in place.

We have been here before.

"They won't touch that with a barge-pole."

But in fact, the Commission is obliged to examine the democratic and legislative process of the application state. It has to determine if the applicant meets the Copenhagen Critera and article 49 of the Maastricht treaty.

And "The rule of law implies that government authority may only be exercised in accordance with documented laws" . That might imply the need for a written constitution.

Of course the EU can abandon its' own rules. Ursula van der Leyen has said that the EU 'goofed up' over Brexit and a new EU could fix it.

And therefore parliament, and a government with a majority, is sovereign and can change any law it disagrees with. So effectively no 'written' rule of law which legislators need to abide by.

But irrespective of what you and I think, the EU commission is obliged to test the 'democratic and legal framework' for compliance, as per Maastricht treaty and Copenhagen criteria. So I cannot agree they will not touch this with a barge pole. - they are legally obliged to do so in order to test compliance.

Ah FFS would you stop.

The UK is just as democratic as the vast majority of EU countries.

Serious question: where did Ursula von der Leyen say this?

Of course the EU will "test the 'democratic and legal framework'" of the UK.

And it will be found within about 10 seconds to be sound and absolutely no request would be made for the UK to change its voting system or adopt a constitution.

The EU is not going to decree that FPTP is not democratic, not least because it would seriously piss off the American, who use that system, to imply that the US is not a proper democracy. There is no mileage for the EU in doing this.

The decision to require PR systems for elections to the European Parliament does not imply that FPTP is "not democratic"; just a decision that the European Parliament should be proportionally representative. It doesn't logically follow that other electoral systems are undemocratic.

I don't think any EU Member State has a law or practice of "election of government by secret ballot". Ireland, for one, does not. Nor does the EU itself; neither the Ccommission nor the Council of Ministers are elected. And lots of EU Member States (again, including Ireland) can appoint, and have appointed, Ministers who are not elected people.

The newspaper report to which you link does not report Leyen saying anything about "a new EU". And there's nothing in there to support the claim that the EU can "abandon its own rules". The notion is silly, and even offensive. The EU can insist that, in member states "authority may only be exercised in accordance with documented laws", and at the same time it is itself unconstrained by its own rules? Seriously?

They are constitutional monarchies. There's no civil constitution betwixt the populace and head of state, which is why you end up with Henry viii laws being invoked.

England never really progressed at that level since the henrician split.

I was probably too imprecise with my language, Peregrinus. You are right , there is no reference to a 'new EU' but rather a reference to "younger generation " or " I keep telling my children, ‘you have to fix it, we goofed it up, you have to fix it’". I meant new personnel in the Commission/Council not a new institution . I was trying to avoid referencing van der Leyen's actual children. My broader point was that Brexit, for all its' faults, was done according to the written treaties of the EU. I think the EU did not 'goofed it up', But perhaps I am reading too much into her remarks.

On the matter of FPTP electoral system I find it hard to see it as a democratic process if by democratic we mean that all the people, the demos, have an equal input into the government process. Representative democracies surely must demonstrate that their electoral systems are representative, surely. I am not sure if what happens in America would have any influence. But if the Eu decide not to examine FPTP because of fear of American reaction that surely that is down to 'political expediency', the point i made in my post.

But the total seats are then adjusted via a proportional weighted system to ensure that the Bundestag as a whole is representative of the proportion of voters for each party.