 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Roland
|
 |
Auf'm Jahrmarkt :(
May 1999
time: 06:19
|
|
Spiffor:
"Decisions are taken by 3 actors : the Commission, the Council, the Parliament."
And the Court of Justice, not to forget, although its political importance has decreased.
"These commissioners are not elected by the people, but chosen by the PMs or Presidents."
And need a vote of confidence in Parliament.
"In a Council meeting, the states can be represented by ministers (when the question is important), but at most by administrators who represent the interest of their State."
Well council decisions are taken by government ministers, but most preparatory work is being done at bureaucrat level.
"Again, the Council is not elected."
Not directly, but the representatives are responsible to their national parliaments, and can be bound by parliamentary instruction, which is namely the case in Denmark and Austria.
"Now, how are the decisions taken ? The Commission elaborates a law (with an extreme pressure from the lobbies)."
The lobbying is intense, the pressure is quite limited. Also, Commission proposals are usually better prepared and more openly discussed than national initiatives, this goes at least in comparison with Austria and Germany.
"When the law is approved by the Council, it then goes to the Parliament, in some cases only."
Most legislation is under codecision now. Parliament is quite powerful now - best seen in the fact that the lobby groups pay much more attention to it now.
"National parliaments are often simply ignored, and they often know what's going on too late, when agreements between governments have been reached."
That problem is centered on the intergouvernemental areas. As for council voting and bargaining, it's up to the national constitution to provide for information rights etc.
"you'd need a Phd in political sciences..."
Or a doctorate in law. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuŕ Rénmín Gňnghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:19
|
|
what freaking class are you talking about?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:19
|
|
Roland : the Parliament may not give confidence to the commission, but it has never been seen : the parliament cannot refuse one commissioner and accept another : when it refuses to give confidence, the whole commission goes to the traps, and months of negociations are ruined.
The lobbying is intense, but worse, it is subtle : as the commission doesn't have enough bureaucrats for the work they have, they often call "independent" experts to prepare their work, to give a scientific background to their decisions. Hat the expert will say and forget to say is very important in the course of the decision : a politician knows he's not versed in science and cannot counteract the whole study : he'll consider almost everything as true. And act accordingly. Of course, the lobbies can influence these experts, to let them forget a not so business friendly data, for example.
Another method of the lobbies is to give to a commissioner or to an underling an already complete, ready-to-sign text. As they have far too much work, they accept this quite often.
Another method is "ideological brainwashing" : say something repeatedly to all your connections in the commission and the parliament, so that your idea becomes accepted over time. That's what the companies and the ecologists do for long, and that explains why the EU is so free-market oriented while pushing for the Kyoto agreement. Leftist groups such as ATTAC are beginning to do so for 4 years, we'll see if they succeed.
Sure, many lobbies go in Brussel to have prime time information of what the EU is going to do, but others really want to pressure the institutions for their own interests.
About the court of justice : it has not much decision power per se, but instead a power to block decisions, and to clarify the deep meaning of the treaties.
I know that European Democracy progresses, but it's extremely slow, and I can't tolerate this sluggishness, which is extremely damaging for the European ideal (which I love... It's on purpose that my localization is "EU")
Paul Hanson :
The EU is a bureaucracy with no enough bureaucrats. It's a bureucracy in the meaning that bureaucrats (I prefer the word "technocrats" : people who are in power not because they were elected, but because they have the "scientific" knowledge of politics) have the power. The representatives have a marginal power : blocking or modifying decisions which were already discussed for months or years. They cannot create laws, which is dramatic.
Adalbertus :
I don't know any organized commissioners group who want more democracy. Maybe most commissioners are diehard democrats in private, but when they talk publicly, it's in the name of the commission. And changing the role of the parliament is not the work of the commission, so they don't speak loudly about this. In fact, for a more democratic Europe, you have to look at diehard Europeans politicians : the Belgians have, the French have Bayrou, the British have none (sorry, a bit of Brit-basing, couldn't resist )etc. The role of the parliament, commission and council are detemined by the big treaties, such as Maastricht or Amsterdam (I refuse to consider Nizza as a big treaty, even if it was intended)
Currently, there is a convention which works on the political future of the EU, led by Valery Giscard d'Estaing. When they give their conclusions, in one year I think, the big treaties will probably take them into account, and give much more democracy in the EU.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Roland
|
|
Auf'm Jahrmarkt :(
May 1999
time: 06:19
|
|
"the Parliament may not give confidence to the commission, but it has never been seen "
Yes, but it still has an effect, eg in the Commissioner hearings, and in who the member states will nominate.
"the parliament cannot refuse one commissioner and accept another"
True. But that's the same in Germany - only a vote of (no-)confidence for the government as a whole (the chancellor to be precise).
"Of course, the lobbies can influence these experts, to let them forget a not so business friendly data, for example."
Usually you have a mix of experts of different affiliations, and some independent ones mostly from universities.
"say something repeatedly to all your connections in the commission and the parliament, so that your idea becomes accepted over time."
Well this works everywhere. Just as well with national governments and parliaments.
"About the court of justice : it has not much decision power per se, but instead a power to block decisions, and to clarify the deep meaning of the treaties."
Well the latter is a huge decision making power, with all the (mostly economic) policies directly enshrined in the treaties.
The main democracy deficit I see is that currently, we can't vote the EU "government" out and a new one in. It is an eternal big coalition of social democrats, conservatives and liberals across the 3 institutions....
Paiktis: no worry... I think I've read a piece by him about EC powers and/or national sovereignty, not sure though....
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:19
|
|
quote:
Well this works everywhere. Just as well with national governments and parliaments. |
Sure, but all institutions / countries are not as wide open to lobbyism : in France, lobbies are seen with a tad of defiance, while in Europe, they're seen as valuable representatives of the civil society. Thus they have much more impact in Europe than in France, but it doesn't mean they don't have any in France.
I still think that, wherever they act, lobbies are evil simply because they betray the very idea of democracy : the politician should enforce his idea of the public good (that's why he's elected), and he's getting influenced to enforce the interests of groups.
It reminds me a thing : a mayor has to choose the best swimming pool project for his city. There are several competitors, and one influences the mayor to choose his own... through money. But here, it's not called lobbyism, it's called corruption  I guess lobbyism is a legal corruption with other means.
BTW, I love your sig
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuŕ Rénmín Gňnghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:19
|
|
you seem to be pretty familiar with that kind of humour... quite odd for a frog...
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19.
Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-04-2002 17:38
)
|