The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Membership of the British House of Lords (and she is still a peer) does not sit well with most peoples idea of democratic accountability and all sides - even the yes campaign - conceded the EU had some way to go to make the EU institutions appear "closer to the people" and to encourage greater popular identification and emotional involvement with those institutions.
Actually, an unelected second-reading chamber helps protect the State from the influence of money. Case in point: if the House of Lords votes down 42-day detention it will be in part because Brown can't threaten the Lords with a snap election where they'd lose their seats, or engage in horse-trading on individual constituency demands.So I am convinced that having two directly elected chambers is a waste but I am not convinced that an unelected second chamber is a bad idea. Spain's Senate definitely is useless as configured and I would much rather it be replaced with the Conference of Presidents.
So I am convinced that having two directly elected chambers is a waste but I am not convinced that an unelected second chamber is a bad idea. Spain's Senate definitely is useless as configured and I would much rather it be replaced with the Conference of Presidents.
The irony I am seeking to highlight (perhaps ad nauseam by now) is that British Eurosceptics never stop criticising the EU for a lack of direct democracy whilst being contemptuous of popular politics within the UK and being supportive of the Queen, The lords, and the constitutional privileges of the House of Commons. There is hardly a country in Europe with less direct democracy than the UK, and a highly flawed first past the post electoral system at that.
Appointing a Baroness to a top EU post is going to do nothing to challenges the faux "unelected Brussels elite" argument they so love to pedal. notes from no w here
Whatever about the UK - and they are as entitled to their internal traditions as anyone else - how is this relevant to the EU?
You are hardly advocating a second, unelected Chamber of the EU Parliament?
But, really, as I am forced to point out repeatedly, the German Federal Council (Bundesrat) is an unelected (that is, indirectly elected) second-reading chamber and nobody clamors for its removal, and it is very analogous to the European Council itself, where representatives of the Member States' governments act in codecision with the directly elected parliament in the EU's legislative process.
Appointing a Baroness to a top EU post is going to do nothing to challenges the faux "unelected Brussels elite" argument they so love to pedal
I thought the Lisbon Treaty and the new posts created under its terms was part of an attempt to encourage greater popular identification and involvement with EU institutions by EU citizens. notes from no w here
Baroness Ashton was only appointed to her various UK ministerial jobs on the basis of being an appointed member of the House of Lords.
Within the institutional context of British politics, her life peerage is totally incidental to a political apparatchik's career. If someone has to be made a peer in order to be a minister because they're not an MP, they are made a peer. It's pretty meaningless. Most non-hereditary peers know this and are not assholes about being a Baron(ess).
Sarah Ludford MEP is also a life peer and nobody questions that she works her arse off as a parlamentarian. Then again, she's in an elected position and in the Lib Dems you have to go through an open (to party members) primary in order to get the #1 slot on the party list. En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
Within the institutional context of British politics, her life peerage is totally incidental to a political apparatchik's career. If someone has to be made a peer in order to be a minister because they're not an MP, they are made a peer.
Precisely my point. In Britain it is possible to have an extensive ministerial career without ever standing for election - something which is less common in most other member states as far as I am aware - and not necessarilly a great way to tackle the acknowledged "democratic deficit" within the EU.
My point is that because of long-standing tradition (some would call in class prejudice) it is not very unusual for senior political leaders never having to be electorally accountable in the UK. As long as they're the right sort of British, that's all well and good old chap.
However the EU has nothing like the long tradition and legitimacy that appears to be bestowed on the British ruling class. What legitimacy it has is largely bestowed on it through popular elections and the participation of popularly elected Governments.
I'm sure if she ends up doing a very good job, none of this will be an issue. But its not a good place to start from right after the difficulties we had in getting a popular endorsement of Lisbon against allegations that it was all an elite project and a conspiracy against ordinary people. notes from no w here
In Britain it is possible to have an extensive ministerial career without ever standing for election - something which is less common in most other member states as far as I am aware
You make a factual claim, I rebut you and you reply with this? I was not part of the yes campaign in Ireland. En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
I've had enough of your populist demagoguery in this thread.
"I've had enough of your populist demagoguery in this thread."
I don't find these statements can be lumped together with other "reasoned arguments and fact."
Without going into the validity of anyone's arguments here, i would be displeased if ET lost the quality Frank Schnittger brings to the table simply because you might dig too deeply for civilized discourse.
If you've indeed had enough of x or y, the proper response is leave it alone.
And i may discuss the anti-Brit thread elsewhere, but not here. "Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
Democracy has nothing to do with it - it's just a convenient stick they can use to beat the dog. If the electorate is dim enough to believe the sceptics have any interest in democratic accountability, more fool them.
Elected leaders are hardly models of excellence - Blair, Aznar, Burlesquoni, ad nauseam - so being elected isn't quite a benchmark of appropriateness.
What this debate underlines is the impossible criteria needed for leadership. If you're elected you're likely to be a spiv, a fool, and/or a sociopath, and if you're unelected you're undemocratic - which is even worse
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 1 6 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 3 14 comments
by Oui - Sep 6 3 comments
by gmoke - Aug 25 1 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 21 1 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 22 56 comments
by Oui - Aug 18 8 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 12 25 comments
by Oui - Sep 8
by Oui - Sep 81 comment
by Oui - Sep 7
by Oui - Sep 63 comments
by Oui - Sep 54 comments
by gmoke - Sep 5
by Oui - Sep 41 comment
by Oui - Sep 47 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 314 comments
by Oui - Sep 211 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 16 comments
by Oui - Sep 114 comments
by Oui - Sep 181 comments
by Oui - Sep 11 comment
by gmoke - Aug 29
by Oui - Aug 2818 comments
by Oui - Aug 271 comment
by Oui - Aug 262 comments
by Oui - Aug 2626 comments