Rather than move European integration forward, the former British Prime Minister set a series of so-called red lines during the Lisbon negotiations, with the intent of blocking any progress in social issues and tax as well as common defence and foreign policy.
Now, At the risk of being fastidious about this, I really have a problem with adopting the narrative that the President of the Council is the President of the European Union. It is clear to some commentators and should be clear to all that there will be four top jobs to be filled, three of which with the title of "President" and one of which up to now identified as "President of the EU":
In the title
Petition against the nomination of Tony Blair as "President of the European Union".
In the first paragraph
We, European citizens of all origins and of all political persuasions wish to express our total opposition to the nomination of Tony Blair to the Presidency of the Council of the European Union.
In the fourth paragraph:
... increasingly insistent rumours have instanced a wish, in some quarters, to see Tony Blair appointed the first "President of the European Union"...
In paragraph nine:
... it seems unthinkable that the first President of the European UnionCouncil should be the former head of a government that kept its country out of two key elements of the construction of Europe ...
And in the concluding paragraph:
At a time when one of the priorities of the European institutions of the European Union is to reconnect with its citizens, we believe it is essential that its the Council's President should be a person with which a majority of citizens can identify.
This may sound like nitpicking but you don't fight narratives without carefully picking every word.
As I wrote this I realised that we don't want Blair representing the EU in any capacity. We could be successful in blocking him as President of the Council but they might say "okay, let's make him Commission President or (worse!) 'Mr. CFSP'". I think we should find a way to block him from all four two jobs. This becomes too clumsy in the opening paragraph, but in the last paragraph it has a place since we mention all the European institutions. We could say
At a time when one of the priorities of the Institutions of the European Union is to reconnect with citizens, we believe it is essential that all of the four top dignataries, the Presidents of the Commission, Council and Parliament and the High Representative for the CFSP, should be people with which a majority of citizens can identify.
progress in social issues and tax as well as common defence and foreign policy harmonisation.
I particularly agree with your final point: we should oppose his nomination to any major post in the EU.
While we're nitpicking: dignataries dignitaries.
progress in social issues and tax harmonisation as well as common defence and foreign policy.
?
Melanchthon, are you around? We should really have a final draft for the English version today, and then ask all our translators to update theirs. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
dignitaries... should be people with whichwhom a majority of citizens *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
increasingly insistent rumours have instanced a wish
This "instanced" sounds to me, I don't know, somehow upper-class. Worse, I had to look it up in the dictionary. Is it just me, or would there be a more common-language variant? *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
increasingly detailed news items have made evident a wish...
(Though "instanced" is not a good choice, I don't think there's an "upper-class/lower-class" issue here. The language of a petition should be as exact as possible, that's all. If you deliberately write it in tabloidese, the kind of people who sign petitions will take no notice of it - sorry if that sounds snobbish, but it's a fact).
