Merkel still backs Juncker...

[Deleted]

actually the way it id now is far more democratic then it was before, but still it is not enough in my opinion.

[questionmark]

actually the way it id now is far more democratic then it was before, but still it is not enough in my opinion.

Where you are quite right, but if every petty little prime minister has a fit every time the system gets a little more democratic it will take quite a while until they actually get to a point where we can call it a democracy.

[Harry_Dresden]

It's all about Britain's National Interest. it's as simple as that. and don't make me laugh about democracy and the EU. go back and read my post about the EPP and why the EU wanted this rule changed as listed in the Lisbon treaty. This NEW process for electing the president is done to ensure the EU get their man. if they continued to use the traditional system it run the risk of the EU not getting their man. its simple as that.

Sorry, Steve, but it has very little to do with Britain's national interests. David Cameron is playing domestic politics by picking a fight with Brussels over an appointment (Juncker) who coincidently is on the same political block as the Tories, so how does this benefit Britain ?Cameron is appealing to the lowest common denominator both in Britain and in the EU. Britain, will be harmed economically and politically with this isolationist policy...make no mistakes, this is about laying the ground work Britain's departure and nothing to do with defending rights.

One must ask how will Britain and Cameron influence Europe in the future if they no longer are in Europe?

[keithisco]

Sorry, Steve, but it has very little to do with Britain's national interests. David Cameron is playing domestic politics by picking a fight with Brussels over an appointment (Juncker) who coincidently is on the same political block as the Tories, so how does this benefit Britain ?Cameron is appealing to the lowest common denominator both in Britain and in the EU. Britain, will be harmed economically and politically with this isolationist policy...make no mistakes, this is about laying the ground work Britain's departure and nothing to do with defending rights.

One must ask how will Britain and Cameron influence Europe in the future if they no longer are in Europe?

Emphasis mine: It is very much in the UK's National Interests when facing a period of intense re-negotiation of fundamental EU Principles, that the person who sets the EU Agenda in such talks is actually open to discussion and able to see both sides of the argument.

It is clear that Juncker, as an unreformed Federalist, will be hostile to ANY nation wanting to renegotiate its terms of Membership if said re-negotiations include any perceived disagreement with closer integration.

[Harry_Dresden]

Emphasis mine: It is very much in the UK's National Interests when facing a period of intense re-negotiation of fundamental EU Principles, that the person who sets the EU Agenda in such talks is actually open to discussion and able to see both sides of the argument.

What intense period of re-negotiation are we talking about? Since when do players threaten to take their 'bat and ball' and go home every time they disagree with the umpires or the rules. I mean this isn't 12th century Europe and we're not choosing the Holy Roman Emperor...truth is that fighting Juncker hard, is popular with the voters and the anti-european establishment that seem to think that the bloody world is gonna end cause of a few Polish migrant workers take liberties with the welfare system while completely disregarding the majority that pay fair taxes.

It is clear that Juncker, as an unreformed Federalist, will be hostile to ANY nation wanting to renegotiate its terms of Membership if said re-negotiations include any perceived disagreement with closer integration.

I don't seriously think, Juncker or ANY other EU bureaucrat does anything without a nod and a wink from Merkel and Hollande...maybe Cameron should just man up and vent his spleen at Merkel and cut with the theatrics.

[keithisco]

What intense period of re-negotiation are we talking about? Since when do players threaten to take their 'bat and ball' and go home every time they disagree with the umpires or the rules. I mean this isn't 12th century Europe and we're not choosing the Holy Roman Emperor...truth is that fighting Juncker hard, is popular with the voters and the anti-european establishment that seem to think that the bloody world is gonna end cause of a few Polish migrant workers take liberties with the welfare system while completely disregarding the majority that pay fair taxes.

Emphasis mine: Seriously? The re-negotiating of the UK ties with the EU - surely you have heard about it?

[Harry_Dresden]

Emphasis mine: Seriously? The re-negotiating of the UK ties with the EU - surely you have heard about it?

I don't know of any other European nation re-negotiating, do you? nor threaten to leave if the de jure politician of the day doesn't get his way. This isn't reasonable, throwing away what others before have taken great pain to bring together. All this bluster and anti-immigrate screaming serves no one but those hoping to be re-elected. I just wish that Cameron would just announce Britain is leaving and be done with it and stop this silly side-show.

EDIT[ Yes i have heard of it just don't see the logic in it]

Edited June 26, 2014 by Harry_Dresden

[stevewinn]

I don't know of any other European nation re-negotiating, do you? nor threaten to leave if the de jure politician of the day doesn't get his way. This isn't reasonable, throwing away what others before have taken great pain to bring together. All this bluster and anti-immigrate screaming serves no one but those hoping to be re-elected. I just wish that Cameron would just announce Britain is leaving and be done with it and stop this silly side-show.

EDIT[ Yes i have heard of it just don't see the logic in it]

are you having a referendum in Scotland, threatening to leave, throwing away all what others before have taken great pain to bring together, all this anti English screaming serves no-one but those hoping to be re-elected.

your having your referendum now let us have ours on the EU, fairs -fair. David Cameron as said he wants to remain in the EU, there are a few Tory back benches who want to leave the EU but so far there is only one political party who want to leave and that's UKIP. the rest are happy to stay in the EU.

give the British people their in/out EU referendum, if they vote to leave the government of the day will have a mandate of the people from the people to start the process of leaving the EU. job jobbed.

Edited June 26, 2014 by stevewinn

[questionmark]

and the fat lady has sung:

Reuters) - European Union leaders nominated Jean-Claude Juncker for European Commission president on Friday by an overwhelming majority over the fierce objections of British Prime Minister David Cameron, who called it "a sad day for Europe".

Cameron forced an unprecedented vote at an EU summit to dramatis his opposition both to the way the former Luxembourg prime minister was chosen and to his suitability for the most powerful EU job. He warned it could influence British voters' eventual decision on whether to leave the European Union.

Juncker, 59, a veteran deal-broker at EU summits for more than two decades, will now go before the European Parliament for a confirmation vote on July 16, where he is likely to win a majority of centre-right and centre-left lawmakers.

Read more

[stevewinn]

and the fat lady has sung:

hands up who is surprised? go back to page one, we all knew Juncker would end up commission President. It was a done deal. Those who applaud his appointment need their heads feeling - When you think the Lib Dems over here who are totally pro EU, to the core. even they opposed his appointment doesn't that tell people something. But never mind.

This appointment also highlights the diverging of the UK and EU, we surely are closer to the Exit door than ever before. but then again the people have been standing waiting by the Exit door for sometime - waiting for the politicians to arrive with the Key to open the door.

Edited June 28, 2014 by stevewinn

[Guest]

hands up who is surprised? go back to page one, we all knew Juncker would end up commission President. It was a done deal. Those who applaud his appointment need their heads feeling - When you think the Lib Dems over here who are totally pro EU, to the core. even they opposed his appointment doesn't that tell people something. But never mind.

This appointment also highlights the diverging of the UK and EU, we surely are closer to the Exit door than ever before. but then again the people have been standing waiting by the Exit door for sometime - waiting for the politicians to arrive with the Key to open the door.

Such dreams. It has always been a relatively minor faction of the UK public who advocate a withdrawal. The current climate has changed because of the economic crisis and UKIPs opportunism. It is very very unlikely to happen in my lifetime despite your ardent wishs to the contrary.

And yes we all predicted the outcome of this, including the bit where Cameron ended up looking like a defeated ass. The only reason this pantomime is taking place is because Cameron is a weak leader of a weak and divided political party and he is having to voice a policy he doesn't even believe in to stop itself tearing itself apart.

Other have said it better than I can;

Downing Street’s intentions to invoke the Luxembourg compromise or force a formal vote on Juncker are worse steps on this dismal path – they’ll humiliate Cameron further, burn what little petrol is left in the goodwill tank, and still yield absolutely nothing of value. The only way to explain Cameron’s strategy besides incompetence would be a desire to demonstrate that the EU’s so obstructive that it’s beyond reform, meaning Cameron could recommend exit in a referendum campaign. If that’s the plan, though, why pursue it in a way that makes the Prime Minister look isolated, deluded and obsessive?

http://civitas.org.uk/newblog/2014/06/david-camerons-eu-strategy-will-backfire-badly/

Br Cornelius

Edited June 28, 2014 by Guest

[stevewinn]

Such dreams. It has always been a relatively minor faction of the UK public who advocate a withdrawal. The current climate has changed because of the economic crisis and UKIPs opportunism. It is very very unlikely to happen in my lifetime despite your ardent wishs to the contrary.

And yes we all predicted the outcome of this, including the bit where Cameron ended up looking like a defeated ass. The only reason this pantomime is taking place is because Cameron is a weak leader of a weak and divided political party and he is having to voice a policy he doesn't even believe in to stop itself tearing itself apart.

Other have said it better than I can;

http://civitas.org.u...backfire-badly/

Br Cornelius

Hang on one minute, im not sure you understanding what's going on here. You keep banging on about Cameron, forget David Cameron for a second, the issue is bigger than Cameron. the Issue is this move by the EU is not in the interest of the United Kingdom as a Nation. I've said it already but you've glossed over it. explain to me why all three political parties are against Mr Junckers appointment. why are the Labour party who are pro EU against it. and explain why the Liberal Democrats the most Pro EU party in the UK, and who'd have signed us up to the Euro if they had their way - why are they - the Lib Dems against the appointment also? try and explain this without once mentioning David Cameron.

Are you also saying that its wrong for a National Leader who is representing the Nations interest - is not allowed to stand up and voice his concerns? is the Prime minister of the worlds sixth largest economy and stature of the United Kingdom one of the Great powers in the region just meant to sit down and keep quiet? is this how the EU works, dont question anything even if its not in your national interest. C'mon Br have a word with yourself.

[Guest]

Hang on one minute, im not sure you understanding what's going on here. You keep banging on about Cameron, forget David Cameron for a second, the issue is bigger than Cameron. the Issue is this move by the EU is not in the interest of the United Kingdom as a Nation. I've said it already but you've glossed over it. explain to me why all three political parties are against Mr Junckers appointment. why are the Labour party who are pro EU against it. and explain why the Liberal Democrats the most Pro EU party in the UK, and who'd have signed us up to the Euro if they had their way - why are they - the Lib Dems against the appointment also? try and explain this without once mentioning David Cameron.

Are you also saying that its wrong for a National Leader who is representing the Nations interest - is not allowed to stand up and voice his concerns? is the Prime minister of the worlds sixth largest economy and stature of the United Kingdom one of the Great powers in the region just meant to sit down and keep quiet? is this how the EU works, dont question anything even if its not in your national interest. C'mon Br have a word with yourself.

There are ways and means to achieve ends and grandstanding to a small faction of your own party is not the way to achieve Camerons stated objectives. that objective is not withdrawal from the EU, it is reform of some aspects of the EU. In order to achieve that you need to form a coalition of other member states and enter into negotiations which involves give and take with your partners. Cameron has made that all but impossible and so has failed to achieve what is best for the UK. this will probably sink his Premiership since he will neither satisfy his Euroskeptics or progress his reform program. Not a win by any definition.

Br Cornelius

[stevewinn]

There are ways and means to achieve ends and grandstanding to a small faction of your own party is not the way to achieve Camerons stated objectives. that objective is not withdrawal from the EU, it is reform of some aspects of the EU. In order to achieve that you need to form a coalition of other member states and enter into negotiations which involves give and take with your partners. Cameron has made that all but impossible and so has failed to achieve what is best for the UK. this will probably sink his Premiership since he will neither satisfy his Euroskeptics or progress his reform program. Not a win by any definition.

Br Cornelius

I knew you wouldn't be able to answer without mentioning Cameron. Forget Cameron, we've discussed that. You seem to think this is Cameron V's the EU, If Cameron is appeasing his back benches who are the Labour Party and Lib Dem's appeasing? like i've pointed out its more than party politics. Its the National interest. The Question i'd like you to answer is this, Why is the Labour Party and Lib Dem's also against Mr Junckers appointment?

[Guest]

Because he doesn't represent their parties in the European Parliament.

Br Cornelius

[Space Commander Travis]

What, a politician from Luxembourg doesn't represent the Liberal Democrat or Labour Party? Get away. So on that basis, they wouldn't support any candidate for any EU position unless they were a member of the Lib Dems or Labour? You'll have to suggest a better answer than that, I'm afraid.

[Guest]

What, a politician from Luxembourg doesn't represent the Liberal Democrat or Labour Party? Get away. So on that basis, they wouldn't support any candidate for any EU position unless they were a member of the Lib Dems or Labour? You'll have to suggest a better answer than that, I'm afraid.

Are you not familiar with the European parliament political groups - or European parties ?

Juncker doesn't represent the European party blocks of either Labour or the Liberals.

Br Cornelius

[stevewinn]

Because he doesn't represent their parties in the European Parliament.

Br Cornelius

You've got to be joking surely? That's not the reason, you can try and answer it again but im not going to push you on the issue. - but never mind in reply to your attempted answer quoted above - Juncker is no longer a member of a political group as president of the commission and that exists thanks to EU rules (and i think its a good rule) it exists to separate the commission from the Parliament so none of the institutions can dominate the other. just in the same way the European Council doesn't dominate either the Commission or the Parliament.

[Guest]

You've got to be joking surely? That's not the reason, you can try and answer it again but im not going to push you on the issue. - but never mind in reply to your attempted answer quoted above - Juncker is no longer a member of a political group as president of the commission and that exists thanks to EU rules (and i think its a good rule) it exists to separate the commission from the Parliament so none of the institutions can dominate the other. just in the same way the European Council doesn't dominate either the Commission or the Parliament.

I think that is a very fair answer I gave. It would be like the 1970's Labour party voting for Margaret Thatcher - not going to happen. He represents the party of EPP a right leaning political party who are not in line with either labour or Liberal policies. In fact the only party he would represent are the Tories and that is why they used to be members of the EPP. Don't let us forget that he was democratically elected to be the EPP's Presidential candidate in Dublin at their congress and he was presented as such in the member parties election manifesto's. This means that the people who voted for the EPP parties directly voted for Juncker in the European election, and that is why he is the elected representative of the voting public of Europe.

The commission is the single least democratic element of the EU and having the President chosen by it is a flaw of the democratic model of the EU up until this point. It really is that simple - you stand for a lack of democracy at EU level - I do not. The current process was instigated to avoid the undemocratic element of the European Commission.

Whatever way you swing it Steve - those are the facts.

Br Cornelius

Edited June 28, 2014 by Guest

[keithisco]

I think that is a very fair answer I gave. It would be like the 1970's Labour party voting for Margaret Thatcher - not going to happen. He represents the party of EPP a right leaning political party who are not in line with either labour or Liberal policies. In fact the only party he would represent are the Tories and that is why they used to be members of the EPP. Don't let us forget that he was democratically elected to be the EPP's Presidential candidate in Dublin at their congress and he was presented as such in the member parties election manifesto's. This means that the people who voted for the EPP parties directly voted for Juncker in the European election, and that is why he is the elected representative of the voting public of Europe.

The commission is the single least democratic element of the EU and having the President chosen by it is a flaw of the democratic model of the EU up until this point. It really is that simple - you stand for a lack of democracy at EU level - I do not. The current process was instigated to avoid the undemocratic element of the European Commission.

Whatever way you swing it Steve - those are the facts.

Br Cornelius

Emphasis mine: this is the flaw in your argument. By claiming that all of those that voted for an MEP whose party is a member of a separate grouping within Europe (the EPP) ALSO voted for Juncker is simply incorrect. "Democracy by Extension" is a specious argument because no-one in the Euro Elections was asked to vote ALSO for Juncker. Had Junckers name been on the Ballot paper, and he won a majority, then he would be supported by democracy. He was NOT on the Ballot, his name did not appear anywhere and therefore, his election to the role is not backed by the democratic principle of universal suffrage.

Edited June 29, 2014 by keithisco

[questionmark]

Emphasis mine: this is the flaw in your argument. By claiming that all of those that voted for an MEP whose party is a member of a separate grouping within Europe (the EPP) ALSO voted for Juncker is simply incorrect. "Democracy by Extension" is a specious argument because no-one in the Euro Elections was asked to vote ALSO for Juncker. Had Junckers name been on the Ballot paper, and he won a majority, then he would be supported by democracy. He was NOT on the Ballot, his name did not appear anywhere and therefore, his election to the role is not backed by the democratic principle of universal suffrage.

That is factually wrong, according to the Lisbon accord the nomination of the Prezz was to be done considering the result of the EU election. I don't know about Britain, but in at least 20 countries of the EU I know of the thingy was stylized as the battle between Junker and Schulz, both the top candidate of their party, though in all countries there were TV coverage of it and they even had a TV debate in most countries (as far as I remember also in the UK).

Cameron's main problem is that he pulled the Tories out of the European Popular Party and therefore had no more say in who could be a successful candidate for the position. And suddenly he realized that and tried to bully his way through, his problem: The times in which Europe gave in to British blackmail ended with Lady Thatcher.

[Guest]

Emphasis mine: this is the flaw in your argument. By claiming that all of those that voted for an MEP whose party is a member of a separate grouping within Europe (the EPP) ALSO voted for Juncker is simply incorrect. "Democracy by Extension" is a specious argument because no-one in the Euro Elections was asked to vote ALSO for Juncker. Had Junckers name been on the Ballot paper, and he won a majority, then he would be supported by democracy. He was NOT on the Ballot, his name did not appear anywhere and therefore, his election to the role is not backed by the democratic principle of universal suffrage.

Do you vote for the Prime Minister when you vote for your local MP. This is in no way materially different.

I do not accept your point. This is not an American style Presidential election and we do not live in an American style Republic. Also the EU President wields no where near the same power as a US President so direct election of this post is inappropriate.

The only point I would concede is that most people may have been unaware that Juncker was their designated representative when they voted for their constituent party - but surely that is a flaw of the people not taking this important election seriously enough. However even this is a dubious point in light of what Questionmark has just posted.

the double standards you pair are coming out with just astounds me

Br Cornelius

Edited June 29, 2014 by Guest

[stevewinn]

I think that is a very fair answer I gave. It would be like the 1970's Labour party voting for Margaret Thatcher - not going to happen. He represents the party of EPP a right leaning political party who are not in line with either labour or Liberal policies. In fact the only party he would represent are the Tories and that is why they used to be members of the EPP. Don't let us forget that he was democratically elected to be the EPP's Presidential candidate in Dublin at their congress and he was presented as such in the member parties election manifesto's. This means that the people who voted for the EPP parties directly voted for Juncker in the European election, and that is why he is the elected representative of the voting public of Europe.

The commission is the single least democratic element of the EU and having the President chosen by it is a flaw of the democratic model of the EU up until this point. It really is that simple - you stand for a lack of democracy at EU level - I do not. The current process was instigated to avoid the undemocratic element of the European Commission.

Whatever way you swing it Steve - those are the facts.

Br Cornelius

Thanks to German backing Junker was acting like he was the 'rightful' elected new head of the EU commission. In fact he only got 382/675 votes to be candidate for the EPP which then got 221/751 seats on a turnout of just over 40%. Democracy my ****.

Juncker represents the old Europe, remember the response by the EU to the elections, seeing the rise of far right groups. Le Pen's Front National, Golden Dawn in Greece, as two examples - the people of Europe have voted in greater numbers for centre right and far right parties. the EU elite said they'd listen to the people, they understand. But the truth is they haven't listened and the appointment by Juncker proves this. The institutions of the EU need reforming Juncker makes that process unlikely. Europe have gone down the same old route and so are destined to make the same old mistakes. At what point will the EU actually listen and confront the dangers emerging? having Juncker is like hitting the self destruct button, watch now what happens to the EU.

[Guest]

Juncker is centre right - what ******* planet are you on Steve.

Br Cornelius

[stevewinn]

Juncker is centre right - what ******* planet are you on Steve.

Br Cornelius

Obviously Not the one your on colonised by Apes that's for sure, If you think Juncker is the man for the job fine. you'll no doubt reap what you sow. Your fanaticism for the EU clearly blinds your judgement. the Lib Dem's and Labour party are both Pro EU and argue against Mr Juncker, I'm anti EU and im arguing against his appointment also. that tells you something.

Your cards were on the table a few posts back when wrongly thought the stance taken by the Lib Dems and Labour over Mr Juncker was because he was not representing their party. in one post you showed a clear lack of understanding and it wasn't only me who noted the failed miserably attempt with other posters astonished.

We'll see exactly how this turns out at the next european elections.

123456789987654321

See Juncker for what he is.

Edited June 29, 2014 by stevewinn