6 ms·

As an European I can tell you that Europeans feel completely disconnected from those EU politicians, they do whatever they please and there is no real input fro

As an European I can tell you that Europeans feel completely disconnected from those EU politicians, they do whatever they please and there is no real input from anyone. The isolated themselves and then force countries into submission via monetary fines if they don't get in line.

alkonaut 6y ago
As another european, I don't agree (Just so we are clear that there are obviously differences here).
tcldr 6y ago
That's exactly the line most of the press seem to tout – and it's that 'feeling' which has been exploited by those who see the EU as an obstacle to their regulatory goals or vision. The fact is that you get to vote for your MEP if you choose to, and they in turn for the commission. It's weird that on the one hand people say the EU "[does] whatever they please and there is no real input from anyone" and on the other have no idea about the EU parliamentary process. It is what you make it. The EU isn't perfect, but I'm always surprised by those in EU countries who think that it would be in their long-term interests to forge a path alone in a bi-polar geopolitical sphere dominated by the US and China, rather than club together with their EU neighbours and have a voice on the world stage.
- Zenst 6y ago
  Some member countries got to vote in the last and one before MEP elections for candidates that did not represent the ruling group that runs the EU. Bit like say New York voting for Mr Happy as President and the country all votes for Mr Sad who has candidates in every state apart from New York. Now in that instance the people of New York's democratic say be kinda futile say in who runs the country as they had no chance. THAT is exactly how MEP voting choice was in some EU member countries that didn't have any EPP representation, say or choice and not a single EPP MEP voted for and yet it is the EPP that runs the EU. Yes the EU isn't perfect but when they can't even sort out their own accounts and get them signed off year upon year, that's not a good sign of leadership or credibility. Heck even they admit they need to reform, which is sad as they didn't admit that until after the whole UK interdependence vote and that vote only came about as the UK leadership went to the EU for reforms and got palmed off with some tokens. Ironically had the EU even bothered to do any attempt at reform before the UK left, the UK could of tabled another vote as things would of changed and sadly the EU didn't do that and more so France been insistent that any reforms do not happen until the UK has left. Remember that the EU was a trade agreement that people voted to join, what it became is something the people had no direct say in at all and that was the root of much divide that has grown over the past few decades. Me I do feel it is in the best interest of the EU and the UK to divorce as the UK has held the EU back upon many votes and looking at the voting history shows this and the EU could of had better financial regulations decades ago, regulations needed to work with the EURO financial model and that has not been good for the Euro. No tabloid or other such outlet was used to form this opinion, other opinions may vary.
  - M2Ys4U 6y ago
    > Some member countries got to vote in the last and one before MEP elections for candidates that did not represent the ruling group that runs the EU. That's equally applicable at the national level too >THAT is exactly how MEP voting choice was in some EU member countries that didn't have any EPP representation, say or choice and not a single EPP MEP voted for and yet it is the EPP that runs the EU. The President of the European Commission may be an EPP member, but the college as a whole is pretty representative of the party make-up of the Parliament as a whole: Party-Group / Commission / Parliament EPP-EPP / 37% / 24% PES-S&D / 33% / 21% ALDE-RE / 19% / 14% Ind-NI / 7% / 14% ECR-ECR / 4% / 8% >Yes the EU isn't perfect but when they can't even sort out their own accounts and get them signed off year upon year, that's not a good sign of leadership or credibility. That's not true, you are repeating disinformation. EU accounts have been signed off with a clean opinion every year since 2007. > Heck even they admit they need to reform So? Integrating an entire continent - and doing it right - takes time and needs to be done in an incremental fashion. > which is sad as they didn't admit that until after the whole UK interdependence vote Again, that is not true. Nobody thought that as soon as the Lisbon Treaty came in to force that the job was done. >and that vote only came about as the UK leadership went to the EU for reforms and got palmed off with some tokens. Once more - that is simply not true. The UK didn't go to the EU with reforms, the UK went to the EU with a set of demands for special treatment. Demands that, in part, would undermine the single market. > Ironically had the EU even bothered to do any attempt at reform before the UK left, the UK could of tabled another vote as things would of changed Can you guess what I'm about to say? Yup, that is not true. The people championing brexit (and by that I mean the politicians and notorious business people like Dyson and Martin) didn't give a shit about "reform". They wanted out and they were damned well going to get out by hook or by crook. Do you really think the likes of the ERG would ever have countenanced a second vote? >Remember that the EU was a trade agreement that people voted to join ARRRGH. No. No it wasn't. The EU has always, always, been a political project to integrate Europe. Don't believe me? Let me quote a landmark case from the Court of Justice from 1963: "The Community constitutes a new legal order of international law for the benefit of which the states have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields and the subjects of which comprise not only member states but also their nationals. Independently of the legislation of member states, Community law therefore not only imposes obligations on individuals but is also intended to confer upon them rights which become part of their legal heritage. These rights arise not only where they are expressly granted by the treaty, but also by reason of obligations which the treaty imposes in a clearly defined way upon individuals as well as upon the member states and upon the institutions of the Community." Does that sound like it's talking about a mere trade agreement? And bare in mind that the UK, Denmark, Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Austria, Cypress, Malta, Sweden, Finland, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovenia and Croatia all applied to join, and then did join, after that judgment was given. That's 21 of the current 27 member states, plus the UK. > what it became is something the people had no direct say in at all Every member state has to agree to treaty changes. People could have voted for governments that would say no to those changes. Many member states usually have referendums - the proposed constitution was vetoed by referendums. Ireland extracted concessions by rejecting the Lisbon Treaty the first time around.
- auganov 6y ago
  > and on the other have no idea about the EU parliamentary process. It is what you make it. Yes. But the problem is people have a very hard time doing that. You cannot engage with EU level politics the same way you can in a real country. All these people speak different languages. Very hard to stay engaged when you have to listen to translations. You hardly ever get the kind of engaging coverage you would for domestic politics. I know most of the politicians and parties in my country. I would easily recognize and have some opinion about most prominent congresspeople and senators in the US. Same goes for knesset members. Yet off top of my head I couldn't name you 10 EU MEPs. I know names of the biggest parties in the EU parliament but I couldn't tell you much about them. Unless EU actually tries to establish a common culture and a common language, I don't see much changing.
  - Spearchucker 6y ago
    My boy goes to a European School (schools set up for employees of the Union), because my girlfriend works for a European institution. I sit on the parents association of the school. That said - There already is a common language and it's English. It may not be officially recognized but it's what everybody working for an EU institution uses. Not knowing any MEPs by name is your choice and not a deficiency of the EU.
    - auganov 6y ago
      Watch any EU parliament video and count how many people speak English. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io8aRZUFCxE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io8aRZUFCxE Even the speaker of the house doesn't. President of the EU commission starts off in her language, briefly reads some English off a piece of paper and then switches back. Maybe 1 in 3 or 4 MEPs speak some English. It's very hard to watch. And mind you, in most EU countries regular people would have trouble following the English translation too, they'd need to find one in their language. I'm not questioning what you said about those working in EU institutions, I'm sure that's true. But that's irrelevant, that's not what drives politics.
- johnzim 6y ago
  The MEPs only get to vote on candidates selected by the council of ministers - there's a means to provide their own candidate if they don't ratify that decision but in reality, the commission is for politicians who missed out on elections in their member state.
stingraycharles 6y ago
There are a lot of statements in your comment, some of them are correct — I really do feel that there is a lack of awareness of the EU, how it’s organized, and what they do. But I do not think they do as they please without any input, etc.

alkonaut 6y ago

As another european, I don't agree (Just so we are clear that there are obviously differences here).

tcldr 6y ago

That's exactly the line most of the press seem to tout – and it's that 'feeling' which has been exploited by those who see the EU as an obstacle to their regulatory goals or vision. The fact is that you get to vote for your MEP if you choose to, and they in turn for the commission. It's weird that on the one hand people say the EU "[does] whatever they please and there is no real input from anyone" and on the other have no idea about the EU parliamentary process. It is what you make it. The EU isn't perfect, but I'm always surprised by those in EU countries who think that it would be in their long-term interests to forge a path alone in a bi-polar geopolitical sphere dominated by the US and China, rather than club together with their EU neighbours and have a voice on the world stage.

Zenst 6y ago
Some member countries got to vote in the last and one before MEP elections for candidates that did not represent the ruling group that runs the EU. Bit like say New York voting for Mr Happy as President and the country all votes for Mr Sad who has candidates in every state apart from New York. Now in that instance the people of New York's democratic say be kinda futile say in who runs the country as they had no chance. THAT is exactly how MEP voting choice was in some EU member countries that didn't have any EPP representation, say or choice and not a single EPP MEP voted for and yet it is the EPP that runs the EU. Yes the EU isn't perfect but when they can't even sort out their own accounts and get them signed off year upon year, that's not a good sign of leadership or credibility. Heck even they admit they need to reform, which is sad as they didn't admit that until after the whole UK interdependence vote and that vote only came about as the UK leadership went to the EU for reforms and got palmed off with some tokens. Ironically had the EU even bothered to do any attempt at reform before the UK left, the UK could of tabled another vote as things would of changed and sadly the EU didn't do that and more so France been insistent that any reforms do not happen until the UK has left. Remember that the EU was a trade agreement that people voted to join, what it became is something the people had no direct say in at all and that was the root of much divide that has grown over the past few decades. Me I do feel it is in the best interest of the EU and the UK to divorce as the UK has held the EU back upon many votes and looking at the voting history shows this and the EU could of had better financial regulations decades ago, regulations needed to work with the EURO financial model and that has not been good for the Euro. No tabloid or other such outlet was used to form this opinion, other opinions may vary.
- M2Ys4U 6y ago
  > Some member countries got to vote in the last and one before MEP elections for candidates that did not represent the ruling group that runs the EU. That's equally applicable at the national level too >THAT is exactly how MEP voting choice was in some EU member countries that didn't have any EPP representation, say or choice and not a single EPP MEP voted for and yet it is the EPP that runs the EU. The President of the European Commission may be an EPP member, but the college as a whole is pretty representative of the party make-up of the Parliament as a whole: Party-Group / Commission / Parliament EPP-EPP / 37% / 24% PES-S&D / 33% / 21% ALDE-RE / 19% / 14% Ind-NI / 7% / 14% ECR-ECR / 4% / 8% >Yes the EU isn't perfect but when they can't even sort out their own accounts and get them signed off year upon year, that's not a good sign of leadership or credibility. That's not true, you are repeating disinformation. EU accounts have been signed off with a clean opinion every year since 2007. > Heck even they admit they need to reform So? Integrating an entire continent - and doing it right - takes time and needs to be done in an incremental fashion. > which is sad as they didn't admit that until after the whole UK interdependence vote Again, that is not true. Nobody thought that as soon as the Lisbon Treaty came in to force that the job was done. >and that vote only came about as the UK leadership went to the EU for reforms and got palmed off with some tokens. Once more - that is simply not true. The UK didn't go to the EU with reforms, the UK went to the EU with a set of demands for special treatment. Demands that, in part, would undermine the single market. > Ironically had the EU even bothered to do any attempt at reform before the UK left, the UK could of tabled another vote as things would of changed Can you guess what I'm about to say? Yup, that is not true. The people championing brexit (and by that I mean the politicians and notorious business people like Dyson and Martin) didn't give a shit about "reform". They wanted out and they were damned well going to get out by hook or by crook. Do you really think the likes of the ERG would ever have countenanced a second vote? >Remember that the EU was a trade agreement that people voted to join ARRRGH. No. No it wasn't. The EU has always, always, been a political project to integrate Europe. Don't believe me? Let me quote a landmark case from the Court of Justice from 1963: "The Community constitutes a new legal order of international law for the benefit of which the states have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields and the subjects of which comprise not only member states but also their nationals. Independently of the legislation of member states, Community law therefore not only imposes obligations on individuals but is also intended to confer upon them rights which become part of their legal heritage. These rights arise not only where they are expressly granted by the treaty, but also by reason of obligations which the treaty imposes in a clearly defined way upon individuals as well as upon the member states and upon the institutions of the Community." Does that sound like it's talking about a mere trade agreement? And bare in mind that the UK, Denmark, Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Austria, Cypress, Malta, Sweden, Finland, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovenia and Croatia all applied to join, and then did join, after that judgment was given. That's 21 of the current 27 member states, plus the UK. > what it became is something the people had no direct say in at all Every member state has to agree to treaty changes. People could have voted for governments that would say no to those changes. Many member states usually have referendums - the proposed constitution was vetoed by referendums. Ireland extracted concessions by rejecting the Lisbon Treaty the first time around.
auganov 6y ago
> and on the other have no idea about the EU parliamentary process. It is what you make it. Yes. But the problem is people have a very hard time doing that. You cannot engage with EU level politics the same way you can in a real country. All these people speak different languages. Very hard to stay engaged when you have to listen to translations. You hardly ever get the kind of engaging coverage you would for domestic politics. I know most of the politicians and parties in my country. I would easily recognize and have some opinion about most prominent congresspeople and senators in the US. Same goes for knesset members. Yet off top of my head I couldn't name you 10 EU MEPs. I know names of the biggest parties in the EU parliament but I couldn't tell you much about them. Unless EU actually tries to establish a common culture and a common language, I don't see much changing.
- Spearchucker 6y ago
  My boy goes to a European School (schools set up for employees of the Union), because my girlfriend works for a European institution. I sit on the parents association of the school. That said - There already is a common language and it's English. It may not be officially recognized but it's what everybody working for an EU institution uses. Not knowing any MEPs by name is your choice and not a deficiency of the EU.
  - auganov 6y ago
    Watch any EU parliament video and count how many people speak English. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io8aRZUFCxE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io8aRZUFCxE Even the speaker of the house doesn't. President of the EU commission starts off in her language, briefly reads some English off a piece of paper and then switches back. Maybe 1 in 3 or 4 MEPs speak some English. It's very hard to watch. And mind you, in most EU countries regular people would have trouble following the English translation too, they'd need to find one in their language. I'm not questioning what you said about those working in EU institutions, I'm sure that's true. But that's irrelevant, that's not what drives politics.
johnzim 6y ago
The MEPs only get to vote on candidates selected by the council of ministers - there's a means to provide their own candidate if they don't ratify that decision but in reality, the commission is for politicians who missed out on elections in their member state.

stingraycharles 6y ago

There are a lot of statements in your comment, some of them are correct — I really do feel that there is a lack of awareness of the EU, how it’s organized, and what they do. But I do not think they do as they please without any input, etc.