|
|
Post by Vinny on Dec 27, 2022 13:58:52 GMT
I altered my post precisely because it was open to that kind of question.
Whereever you get politicians, there are some who are crooks.
The EU is not immune to this problem.
It has it, just as the commons has it, just as devolved bodies have it, just as councils have it.
The problem with governments and corruption (I could be wrong, but this is my perspective), the bigger they get, the worse they get.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 27, 2022 14:21:14 GMT
I altered my post precisely because it was open to that kind of question. Whereever you get politicians, there are some who are crooks. The EU is not immune to this problem. It has it, just as the commons has it, just as devolved bodies have it, just as councils have it. The problem with governments and corruption (I could be wrong, but this is my perspective), the bigger they get, the worse they get. The more detached organisations are from effective scrutiny the bigger the problem. It's somewhat perverse that you have singled out the EU because they did have scrutiny and exposed scandals whereas other governments a lot closer to home are doing their best to frustrate effective scrutiny. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Dec 27, 2022 16:46:04 GMT
There is scrutiny via MEPs but unfortunately the publics ability to control and scrutinise policy direction at the ballot box, is extremely limited as Commissioners are appointed, not elected.
That doesn't mean I'm not critical of other governments, including our own, or our not particularly effective voting system.
And you know whose government I am most critical of, because we're in agreement about Putin....
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 27, 2022 17:02:17 GMT
There is scrutiny via MEPs but unfortunately the publics ability to control and scrutinise policy direction at the ballot box, is extremely limited as Commissioners are appointed, not elected. .. The Commission is the servant of the Council. The Council are the elected prime ministers of every member state. It's common sense that those in charge (the prime ministers of the member states, the Council) should choose their servants, the people they think are best for the job, who will do as they wish. There is no appetite to elevate the Commission by making it an elected office. Such a body would be the equal of the member states' elected prime ministers. This would be a huge transfer of sovereignty from the member states and their parliaments (not to mention the problems created by potential disagreement between the Commission and the Council). You have to decide whether you want the Commission to be the servant of the national parliaments or whether you want it to be its equal or even its superior. You appear to want it to be one of the latter. Those of us who want the member states to remain in control don't want that. That would entail a transfer of too much sovereignty from the member states. It has to be said that you have some very strange ideas for someone who claims to be concerned about national sovereignty, Vinny. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 27, 2022 20:06:57 GMT
There is scrutiny via MEPs but unfortunately the publics ability to control and scrutinise policy direction at the ballot box, is extremely limited as Commissioners are appointed, not elected. .. The Commission is the servant of the Council. The Council are the elected prime ministers of every member state. It's common sense that those in charge (the prime ministers of the member states, the Council) should choose their servants, the people they think are best for the job, who will do as they wish. There is no appetite to elevate the Commission by making it an elected office. Such a body would be the equal of the directly elected prime ministers. This would be a huge transfer of sovereignty from the member states and their parliaments (not to mention the problems created by potential disagreement between the Commission and the Council). You have decide whether you want the Commission to be the servant of the national parliaments or whether you want it to be its equal or even its superior. You appear to want it to be one of the latter. Those of us who want the member states to remain in control don't want that. That would entail a transfer of too much sovereignty from the member states. It has to be said that you have some very strange ideas for someone who claims to be concerned about national sovereignty, Vinny. The Commission is the servant of the Treaties I would think. If the Council wishes something done against the treaties it is the Commissions duty to say Non. That is why legislation initiation is in the power of the Commission to ensure that it all complies with the treaties. The treaties are the binding force. What the treaties say, and mean, of course is the subject of interpretation. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 27, 2022 20:13:25 GMT
The Commission is the servant of the Council. The Council are the elected prime ministers of every member state. It's common sense that those in charge (the prime ministers of the member states, the Council) should choose their servants, the people they think are best for the job, who will do as they wish. There is no appetite to elevate the Commission by making it an elected office. Such a body would be the equal of the directly elected prime ministers. This would be a huge transfer of sovereignty from the member states and their parliaments (not to mention the problems created by potential disagreement between the Commission and the Council). You have decide whether you want the Commission to be the servant of the national parliaments or whether you want it to be its equal or even its superior. You appear to want it to be one of the latter. Those of us who want the member states to remain in control don't want that. That would entail a transfer of too much sovereignty from the member states. It has to be said that you have some very strange ideas for someone who claims to be concerned about national sovereignty, Vinny. The Commission is the servant of the Treaties I would think. If the Council wishes something done against the treaties it is the Commissions duty to say Non. That is why legislation initiation is in the power of the Commission to ensure that it all complies with the treaties. The treaties are the binding force. What the treaties say, and mean, of course is the subject of interpretation. It's the ECJ's job to say non. Just as it is the job of the British courts to delineate the parameters of what an employer may ask of its employee/servant in the UK . What's your point? Can you do what Vinny obviously can't - can you explain how an elected Commission would work? Vinny and his Brexiter mates have a real bee in their bonnet about the Commission not being elected. They don't seem to appreciate what this would mean for the power dynamic between the parliaments in the member states and the EU . It would mean a transfer of power away from national parliaments with a resultant dilution of national sovereignty. Don't you think it's funny that someone like Vinny who claims to be so concerned about national sovereignty should want an elected Commission? |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 27, 2022 21:04:43 GMT
There is scrutiny via MEPs but unfortunately the publics ability to control and scrutinise policy direction at the ballot box, is extremely limited as Commissioners are appointed, not elected. That doesn't mean I'm not critical of other governments, including our own, or our not particularly effective voting system. And you know whose government I am most critical of, because we're in agreement about Putin.... Not just the MEPs, the EU has one of the most rigorous audit systems. www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/ecadefault.aspx |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Dec 27, 2022 21:39:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 27, 2022 21:44:27 GMT
Which shows that they do properly audit
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Dec 27, 2022 21:49:52 GMT
Yes, and I grant you, they're getting better at dealing with audits.
BUT in 2016 I had to deal with the EU we were in, not the EU that might be.
I looked at it, and saw more reasons to be out than in.
And I saw no hope of reform.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 27, 2022 22:19:39 GMT
Yes, and I grant you, they're getting better at dealing with audits. BUT in 2016 I had to deal with the EU we were in, not the EU that might be. I looked at it, and saw more reasons to be out than in. And I saw no hope of reform. So you didn't read the one year later Full Fact report fullfact.org/europe/did-auditors-sign-eu-budget/
'In the most recent year, they found a significant part of the EU’s spending was largely error-free for the first time.' |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 27, 2022 22:21:47 GMT
A lot of the errors the EU auditors find are very technical. If a project uses EU funding it doesn't just have to have the EU flag displayed, all relevant contracts have to be advertised on pan EU accessible web sites in all official EU languages. Omit one language and the auditors put it on the improperly spent list.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 27, 2022 22:24:18 GMT
I altered my post precisely because it was open to that kind of question. Whereever you get politicians, there are some who are crooks. The EU is not immune to this problem. It has it, just as the commons has it, just as devolved bodies have it, just as councils have it. The problem with governments and corruption (I could be wrong, but this is my perspective), the bigger they get, the worse they get. Is this a subliminal argument for Scottish independence? You've come a long way, Vinny. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 27, 2022 22:39:47 GMT
The Commission is the servant of the Treaties I would think. If the Council wishes something done against the treaties it is the Commissions duty to say Non. That is why legislation initiation is in the power of the Commission to ensure that it all complies with the treaties. The treaties are the binding force. What the treaties say, and mean, of course is the subject of interpretation. It's the ECJ's job to say non. Just as it is the job of the British courts to delineate the parameters of what an employer may ask of its employee/servant in the UK . What's your point? Can you do what Vinny obviously can't - can you explain how an elected Commission would work? Vinny and his Brexiter mates have a real bee in their bonnet about the Commission not being elected. They don't seem to appreciate what this would mean for the power dynamic between the parliaments in the member states and the EU . It would mean a transfer of power away from national parliaments with a resultant dilution of national sovereignty. Don't you think it's funny that someone like Vinny who claims to be so concerned about national sovereignty should want an elected Commission? I do not want an elected Commission because I do not want the Commission at all and at this moment I have not got it. I used to be happy with our system but that seems to be open to extensive abuse on a regular basis. I do not want this EU now I have to say I do not want what we have here either as it has been slowly destroyed and consumed from within by the incumbents over the last several decades at least. It is a shame but there seems little saving graces in any of them now. The only consolation I have is that it is possible for us, the sovereign us, to kick them all into the long grass come 2024 but I hold out little hope. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 27, 2022 22:52:29 GMT
It's the ECJ's job to say non. Just as it is the job of the British courts to delineate the parameters of what an employer may ask of its employee/servant in the UK . What's your point? Can you do what Vinny obviously can't - can you explain how an elected Commission would work? Vinny and his Brexiter mates have a real bee in their bonnet about the Commission not being elected. They don't seem to appreciate what this would mean for the power dynamic between the parliaments in the member states and the EU . It would mean a transfer of power away from national parliaments with a resultant dilution of national sovereignty. Don't you think it's funny that someone like Vinny who claims to be so concerned about national sovereignty should want an elected Commission? I do not want an elected Commission because I do not want the Commission at all and at this moment I have not got it. I used to be happy with our system but that seems to be open to extensive abuse on a regular basis. I do not want this EU now I have to say I do not want what we have here either as it has been slowly destroyed and consumed from within by the incumbents over the last several decades at least. It is a shame but there seems little saving graces in any of them now. The only consolation I have is that it is possible for us, the sovereign us, to kick them all into the long grass come 2024 but I hold out little hope. But you realise that an elected Commission wouldn't work, don't you? How could it? The EU Parliament has power to sack the Commission, so, if the Commission was elected, we would have a situation where one elected body could sack another elected body. If the same approach were followed in the UK, a Labour dominated Parliament would sack a Tory dominated Commission (and vice versa) just on principle. Simply impractical. It's also the case that the Commission is supposed to carry out the Council's vision. If you have a vision for your organisation you want to be sure that your employees understand that vision and are prepared and able to pursue it. So, it makes sense that the you would choose your employees. The Commission are the servants of the Council. It's simply logical that the Council should choose who is best to pursue its vision. It couldn't possibly work if someone else got to choose the Council's servants. |
|
