Democracy EU style.

  • Thread starter david and julie
  • Start date

david and julie

I was reading my daily paper today :LOL: :LOL: and saw this.

Should unelected EU commisioner Peter Mandleson be allowed to do this? especially bearing in mind Tony got him this job and Pakistan was helping the west. Remember he is doing this in our name even though we have had no say.

A NORTH west Euro MP has accused EU trade commissioner Peter Mandelson of threatening up to 300,000 jobs in Pakistan.
Liberal/Democrat MEP Sajjad Karim has temporarily blocked a move by Mr Mandelson to slash Pakistani textile exports to EU countries.
Mr Mandelson wanted to remove the favourable trade status awarded to Pakistan because of its co-operation with the west after 9/11.
But during a debate on the move at the European Parliament in Strasbourg Mr Karim managed to persuade Euro MP to back his amendment protecting Pakistani textile exports to Britain and Europe.
But now Mr Mandelson has indicated he will ignore the vote and press ahead with removing Pakistan's trade advantage.

In a Euro parliament debate Mr Karim told the MEPs that Madelson's proposals would be a body blow to Pakistan textile industry and could destroy 300,000 jobs.

Still no doubt this is building bridges EU style, I can only guess at what Pakistan may say if we asked for their help in the future.

We have all seen what EU supporters on here think of the US and I am curious if this opinion is rife in the EU and if it is, why?
Sponsored Links
Maybe it may have something to do with Pakistans choice to buy US planes other than the far too expensive and obsolete Euroflunker----------Cue Damocles
I am not quite sure what you are worrying about DJ, or maybe you are just making an observation. Cheap textiles from places such as India and Pakistan destroyed the UK textile industry. At the time it was probably hundreds of thousands of British jobs got the chop. The wheel turns, and now these same nations are losing out to someone else.

The EU is there to help nations inside it, not out. That would be Mandelssons job.

Or was this an observation on the powerlessness of the EU parliament? In that case I would agree. The parliament is very weak and could do with more teeth. At the moment the EU is totally controlled by the national governments and has very little independent ability to carry out the will of its voters.
Sorry Freddie, you beat me to it there. But I don't imagine the EU would feel obliged to specially favour an ally of America when America's stirring up trouble must have cost the EU a small fortune in added security measures.
Sponsored Links
Are you on drugs drink or just plain bonkers-----------they told you why Mandelso does what he wants regardless because there is no democracy in the EU, the EU members can do want they want they arent answerable to antone but theirselves -----you turkey
Actually a big fortune, now that I think about it. Possibly as much as our own excess contributions to the EU.
Several here. It seems you like to debate matters of state too. Do I have to really repeat how the EU works?

I think you said that all member governments of the EU are answerable to no one but themselves? Is that what you meant?

Commisioners are appointed by their home governments. Carefully chosen to think and vote the way their government wants.

Ministers going to vote on EU decision are all members of their home governments.

The only piece chosen by real people is the parliament. Which as you pointed out can generally be overruled by the other two, High time the parliament had some more power and a chance to actually do what the people voted for.

In reality the EU almost always runs by veto. The only things which get through are those unobjectionable to every government.
Of course, this bears worrying similarity with our own parliament! :eek:

So many really bad ideas can be put into action without a majority vote. Just so long as it doesn't require a change in the law, the PM can do pretty much what he wants (and there are probably loopholes to be exploited if it does require a change in the law!)

To tell the truth, I am surprised that the EU even awarded Pakistan favourable trading status after 11/9. Much of the EU effectively ignored the whole thing, or couldn't make up their minds if they were going to do anything.

Ever noticed how parallels appear in history so often? In WW2, the US dragged their heels because of the "not our war, let's not get involved" argument. 60 years later swathes of Europe drag their heels because "not our war, let's not get involved". Makes me wonder, if the US were not centralised, would we have had Texas sending troops in 1939 and California telling us war is not the answer?
I don't recall saying I was worried, I don't need to worry, I am protected by the EU.

The topic is called Democracy EU style because I am pointing out that an unelected commisioner is able to totally ignore the MEP's. These MEP's are the only people in the EU who are elected rather than appointed and yet at Mandlesons whim, he can ride roughshod over them. It is the lack of democratic accountability that bothers me.

I cannot remember reading anything about improved accountability in the constitution, so am worried that this dictatorial attitude may get worse.

At the moment the EU is totally controlled by the national governments and has very little independent ability to carry out the will of its voters.

But the MEP's voted against it, the Gov isn't mentioned, the article says it is solely Peter Mandlesons decision.

This all sounds like an anti US spite to me, unless of course they ban all such aid which I would agree with. The past imports which cost jobs here were because they were cheaper whereas this is pure politics.
The US felt obliged to join in WW2 because Japan sank half their pacific fleet. Then Hitler declared war on them. Some consider that this was a mistake on his part because they still might not have attacked Germany otherwise.

All Iraq did to us was make some abusive speeches and refuse to let foreigners into their country.
Damocles said:
Ministers going to vote on EU decision are all members of their home governments.

This is why I think the EU can't work properly in it's current state. If only we could somehow erase all trace of national loyalty in people before they take up posts as EU ministers...

I realise that in our own Commons, each MP is meant to be looking after their own constituency, but I think that national loyalty runs a lot deeper and is much much stronger. It is not hard to run into a conflict of interests. OK, so we are talking textiles here, but what if this was over the import of beef? Britain exports a shedload of beef to Europe <thrusts pelvis in the general direction of France>, we would stand to gain. And everyone would cry foul!
Damocles said:
All Iraq did to us was make some abusive speeches and refuse to let foreigners into their country.

Hmmmm, could say the same thing about Hitler invading most of Europe... didn't really affect us out here.

Plus Sadam Hussein is a right d*ck. He lived in a hole in the ground for chrissakes! And my mum told me to never trust a man with a beard.

What's old Sadam up to nowadays anyway? Aren't they meant to be handing him over to the new Iraq government soon? Apologies for the digression.
All Iraq did to us was make some abusive speeches and refuse to let foreigners into their country.

Can't see the connection with EU Dictatorship here though Damacles.

The foreigners(if they were all foreigners) you mention were the UN inspectors who he had previously agreed could do their work. I do accept that Blair and Bush couldn't get in there quick enough and that they told lies, however letting the UN finish (the first time) would of taken the wind out B+B's sails.

That wasn't all Iraq did they invaded Kuwait and were threatening to do it again.
Sponsored Links