GwynapNud the Braindead wrote:
RedPhoenixxx, the main problem we (Britain) have with Europe is that the policians do not respect the population.
If you're complaining about the Lisbon Treaty, it's almost never been the case that countries are consulted by referendums on new treaties. There are new treaties every 4-5 years, to make a few tweaks to the institutions, and adjustments to how they apply the subsidiarity principle.
The only reason why there was talk of a referendum was because a Constitution was put forward a couple of years ago. It got rejected by France and the Netherlands before the UK even had a chance to vote on it. But the Constitution was much broader than the Treaty: it included a new kind of Bill of Rights, and some symbolic stuff like a permanent President, a "foreign Minister" and new majority voting areas. It wasn't earth-shattering by any means, but still was more substantial than the Lisbon Treaty.
Now, if your gripe is that the UK doesn't get to vote on treaties, please think about what this would entail: that every 4 years, 27 European countries hold simultaneous referendums, and if 1 out of 27 countries says no, a country like, say, Luxembourg (pop 400,000), then the other 26 countries (pop 500,000,000) can't do anything. Add to this the fact that the EU has had a large amount of new members recently, that the current institutions were designed for 15-17 countries maximum, and you get an idea why maybe its a good time pass a bloody Treaty through Parliament to make something happen.
On top of that, a lot of people simply
don't understand the EU. What that MEP said is, unfortunately, true. Especially so in England where it's practically a criminal offence to learn about EU institutions. Do you know what the Commission does? How its members are chosen? How the proportional representation works? What about the Council? What about the European Parliament, any idea what powers they have? Who your MEP is? What laws have been passed in the EU in the last year?
And, I assume, you're an educated person. Most people aren't. So, if you're going to vote on something, you should really, perhaps, maybe, learn about the bloody thing you're voting about. Does anyone ever debate EU institutions in the UK? Ever heard a TV programme were they discussed them? Neither have I, and I listen to Radio 4 everyday.
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
The problem I have with the EU is that the votes of the members are not respected.
They are respected. But there are 27 members, and if we want to get anything done, wait, not even that, if we want to update the institutions so they can function with 27 members as opposed to 15, we need to find a way to pass legislation through. And passing legislation through national Parliaments, where
directly elected politicians vote on the matter, like they do for every single other law passed in the country, doesn't seem like the most undemocratic mechanism to me. The treaty is there for you to read it. Every law passed in the EU is on the EU website. You can learn exactly what each institution does there too. I fail to see how any of this is undemocratic or obscure.
I realise there are plenty of faults within the EU. Plenty. The size and make-up of the farm subsidies, for one. The archaic institutions, for another. The sh*tty PR, definitely. These exist, but they are very rarely seriously debated in this country.
I know this is turning into a gbaji post, but there just another couple of points. The people who want the EU to work have realised that unanimity with 27 countries would pose a problem a long time ago. The time when one country could effectively stop everyone else going forward is, pretty much, over. Countries that want to move ahead will do so, while those that want to stay outside stay outside. It will be, and in many ways already is, a multi-tiered EU. The Euro is the best example. Had we waited for 27 countries to reach the economic targets, and then hold referendum, it would never have happened. Same for the Schengen agreement. The Erasmus programme. That is the future of the EU. It's become too big to be anything else. The next step, most likely, is going to be the military, with the creation of a proto-EU army.
These are critical issues. The future of Europe, our role in the world as European nation-states, the opportunities we leave to our kids, and our ability to influence and shape world events, all depend on issues like this one. Like what we do with the EU. And while lots of countries are having this debate, I'm sorry to say that the UK is mostly still concerned with spitting at something it doesn't want to understand.
Edit: Ding! Edited, Dec 2nd 2008 11:33pm by RedPhoenixxx