Blair for EU presidency?

dlofnep

Why exactly is a man who oversaw the deaths of a million people in Iraq a prime candidate for EU presidency? Is this the future of the European Union? Does anyone welcome Blair for presidency?

The middle-east will certainly not welcome the move, and it will put the EU in a bad light, rewarding someone like this with the presidency of the EU. The EU needs to elect someone that has a better standing in the world. Blair does not have this.

He lacks the moral fibre for such a position.

Martin 2

dlofnep wrote: »

Why exactly is a man who oversaw the deaths of a million people in Iraq a prime candidate for EU presidency? Is this the future of the European Union? Does anyone welcome Blair for presidency?

The middle-east will certainly not welcome the move, and it will put the EU in a bad light, rewarding someone like this with the presidency of the EU. The EU needs to elect someone that has a better standing in the world. Blair does not have this.

He lacks the moral fibre for such a position.

I think Blair would be a very divisive choice, but to be honest even if he's put forward there's no guarantee he'd get the job, Blair's position on Iraq was unpopular in many EU countries.
There seems to be quite a bit of momentum behind Mary Robinson for the position... I remember seeing in one of the papers that a website has been set-up to promote her candidacy.

Ps. just one small point, it's the president of the EU council

Dinner

Despite what Sky News will tell you, the position is NOT EU President, President of the EU or 'Our President'. The position is President of the European Council, a position which, for all intents and purposes, has existed for decades. It's moving from what is, effectively, a 6 month rotating position to a full time 2.5 year term (max of 2 terms). I would like to think that we can continue this thread without misrepresenting the position but I'm sure thats just naive.


Anyway, Blair only seems to be 'Prime Candidate' according to 1) The British Media or 2) Anti Lisbon supporters. To the rest of us, Blair is one of many possible names. And not a popular one at that. As far as I'm aware both the Benelux states and Poland (among others) have spoken out against Blair for the position.

dlofnep

Dinner wrote: »

Despite what Sky News will tell you, the position is NOT EU President, President of the EU or 'Our President'. The position is President of the European Council, a position which, for all intents and purposes, has existed for decades. It's moving from what is, effectively, a 6 month rotating position to a full time 2.5 year term (max of 2 terms). I would like to think that we can continue this thread without misrepresenting the position but I'm sure thats just naive.

I'm quite aware of this. Nowhere did I state otherwise. EU presidency is a perfectly apt title.

Dinner wrote: »

Anyway, Blair only seems to be 'Prime Candidate' according to 1) The British Media or 2) Anti Lisbon supporters. To the rest of us, Blair is one of many possible names. And not a popular one at that. As far as I'm aware both the Benelux states and Poland (among others) have spoken out against Blair for the position.

Once again, I never stated that he was the only prime candidate. I said he was A prime candidate. Which appears to be the case.

Dinner

dlofnep wrote: »

I'm quite aware of this. Nowhere did I state otherwise. EU presidency is a perfectly apt title.

No, it's a perfectly incorrect title that is used by anti-EU and anti-Lisbon supporters to indicate that we will somehow be subservient to Blair 'when' he gets the job. This is false. And the only reason for calling it 'President of the EU' is to garner support for a particular agenda.

dlofnep wrote: »

Once again, I never stated that he was the only prime candidate. I said he was A prime candidate. Which appears to be the case.

I wasn't attacking you in particular. More the fact that Blair's likelihood for getting the position is massively overblown by both his supporters, who want him to get the job and by 'anti Lisbon/EU' people who use Blair's unpopularity with the public as a tool to turn people against the EU and try to pretend that the EU is turning into 'our masters' and we will all obey.

Don't get me wrong, Blair could get the job. But his likelihood to get the position is much less probable than the media seem to believe.

Mr.Micro

What a sham the whole EU would be if the likes of Blair was given the job of President. Who would the EU be at war with within 5 minutes, an exaggeration I know. As far as I am concerned the likes of Blair would taint the office with all the blood of Iraqis, men, women and children on his hands. Giving him the job is not IMO the best way to start post Lisbon (providing the Czechs agree to ratify etc) and he should go work for Bush on his ranch. Labour are finished in the UK come the spring election and the likes Milliband just wants to have a thorn he thinks in the side of Cameron's Conservative Government with the likes of Blair as President. Blair is right of the Conservatives and no more Labour than Thatcher ever was. The only place he should be going is to the Hague.

Steviemak

Mr.Micro wrote: »

What a sham the whole EU would be if the likes of Blair was given the job of President. Who would the EU be at war with within 5 minutes

I don't believe the Chairman for the European Council will have any such power.

Lame Lantern

We're hearing a lot about Blair in this part of the world due to the British media running with the story. He may enjoy support from Sarkozy and potentially from Merkel but at the European level Jean-Claude Juncker will enjoy a lot more backing.

Blair would be a divisive figure and a bad choice for an institution with a serious PR problem. Hopefully this will be recognised.

The Saint

I think Blair would be a very divisive appointment. Most people will just think of the Iraq war, which the vast majority of Europeans opposed. It would also alienate a lot of people around the world, particularly in the Middle East.

I agree that Junker would be a better option. As stated by the Chief Whip of the junior coalition partner in Germany:

"We want to bring European countries closer together, and I think if someone is from a smaller country these people are more sensitive and they know the problems of the smaller ones, and I think that would be helpful for Europe. Europe is too dominated by the biggest ones."

I think this seems like an option to keep everyone happy.

Nodin

...fresh from his success as 'middle east peace envoy'....Christ no.

ConsiderThis

it's interesting to see the merry dance of trying to get Tony Blair elected continue.

The Times today tells us that "Tony Blair will stand for the presidency of the European Union if its leaders agree that the role is a substantial one requiring clout on the world stage, The Times has learnt."

Learned, probably, from a 10 Downing street, who are said to be pushing for Blair to get the role, or from Blair himself.

Should such a skilled political operator such as Blair get the job, it's quite likely the job will develop into something more substantial that many envisaged.

ConsiderThis

I see Blairs star is now said to be fading again in today's Times. "Tony Blair’s chances of becoming the European Union’s first president were fading fast last night as opposition to his selection grew across Europe and France and Germany failed to throw their weight behind him..."

What a fickle world we seem to live in!

Nodin

May not happen at all, at all.

Tony Blair's hopes of becoming Europe's first sitting president were receding fast last night as Britain admitted his chances of success were "fading" after the continent's centre-right leaders made it clear one of their own must have the post.
Hours after Gordon Brown delivered his strongest statement of support for Blair – disclosing that he had spoken to him earlier this week – British sources indicated that the former prime minister was unlikely to assume the high-profile job.

link

marco_polo

Blair looks finished. I stuck a few quid on the Dutch PM Jan Peter Balkenende last night.

Heres hoping

marco_polo

ConsiderThis wrote: »

I see Blairs star is now said to be fading again in today's Times. "Tony Blair’s chances of becoming the European Union’s first president were fading fast last night as opposition to his selection grew across Europe and France and Germany failed to throw their weight behind him..."

What a fickle world we seem to live in!

Of course it could be that he is deeply unpopular throughout much of Europe and never had a great chance of becoming Council President. All the talking up was being done entirely by the British press.

Looks a number of posters here were absolutely spot on in all the 'Blair is a shoe-in for President threads'.

BroomBurner

I know I'm going to sound unpopular here, but Blair does have a very good track record with international relations (outside the whole Iraq/Afghan wars) and would easily be able to do the job well. However, I think the job would be beneath him. The main role of the presidency is to ensure that the EU stays on track with whatever plans it has set in motion. A little bit mundane for Blair, tbh.

I'm not sure if Juncker is well-known enough to be a shoe-in. It does seem more likely that the EU is looking for a smaller MS to put forward someone. There will always be the power of the bigger members though.

Lame Lantern

(outside the whole Iraq/Afghan wars)

In all fairness, that's really what's going to stand out on any foreign policy CV.

MarkK

I never thought Blair would get it.

The job needs someone who all 27 EU Heads of Government can get along with.
With the likely prospect of a Tory government in Britain it was never going to work.
If the job was up for grabs a year ago it would have been much more likely.

greendom

I'd love to see Cameron's face, newly elected Prime Minister,, seeing Blair at the head of the table when he goes to his first European Council meeting. It would be worth it just for that

View

marco_polo wrote: »

Blair looks finished. I stuck a few quid on the Dutch PM Jan Peter Balkenende last night.

Heres hoping

You do know he had been dubbed "Harry Potter" with some justification, don't you?

ConsiderThis

greendom wrote: »

I'd love to see Cameron's face, newly elected Prime Minister,, seeing Blair at the head of the table when he goes to his first European Council meeting. It would be worth it just for that

Actually, William hague made a brilliant speech in Parliament about Brown greeting Tony Blair,as the president of the EU, to No 10.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6Cj1b-rp1E

Moonriver99

The day we signed over our rights with the Lisbon Treaty was the day Tony Blair was smiling. i think its so undemocratic that we should all have to be appointed a president with NO SAY whatsoever in who it is/ it actually makes me so angry to think that we will have him as the face of europe.

prinz

Moonriver99 wrote: »

The day we signed over our rights with the Lisbon Treaty was the day Tony Blair was smiling. i think its so undemocratic that we should all have to be appointed a president with NO SAY whatsoever in who it is/ it actually makes me so angry to think that we will have him as the face of europe.

We never really had a say before now either? Did you have a say in the Swedish Prime Minister getting the job? Did you have a say in Blair having the job twice before?

What makes you think it would be any different if we did "have a say" so to speak, the Irish population is <1% of the population of the EU as a whole roughly speaking. If everyone had a say how would we ever hope to get to have any sort of influence over who gets the job? Any other way of giving an Irish vote more weight against another citizen's vote would be undemocratic. How would you propose it's done? Every other country gets to propose some and we get a special veto because we're special?

Steviemak

Moonriver99 wrote: »

The day we signed over our rights with the Lisbon Treaty was the day Tony Blair was smiling. i think its so undemocratic that we should all have to be appointed a president with NO SAY whatsoever in who it is/ it actually makes me so angry to think that we will have him as the face of europe.

It is worrying that in a country that has had a referendum at every step of the EU development there is still such ignorance when it comes to the EU.

View

Moonriver99 wrote: »

The day we signed over our rights with the Lisbon Treaty was the day Tony Blair was smiling. i think its so undemocratic that we should all have to be appointed a president with NO SAY whatsoever in who it is/ it actually makes me so angry to think that we will have him as the face of europe.

So, off the top of your head:
i) Who is the President of the European Parliament?
ii) What (EU level) party do they belong to?
iii) What do you know about the "past performance" of the individual concerned both in the European Parliament and/or prior to their time there?

No cheating now - no looking it up in Google!

When you have finished the quiz, please explain if you consider the choice of President of the European Parliament more or less "undemocratic" than that of a potential President of the European Council, and if so why?

namloc1980

Looks like Blair is out of the Council Presidency race and the Belgian Prime Minister Herman van Rompuy is the man for the job.

All of you who feared a Yes to Lisbon would usher in a Blair dictatorship can rest easy now!

IMO Blair was never in the running for this and his 'candidacy' was only overblown British media hype!

Dinner

namloc1980 wrote: »

IMO Blair was never in the running for this and his 'candidacy' was only overblown British media hype!

I agree. It's just unfortunate that some people were intent on blowing it all out of proportion to try to garner support for their own agenda. I suppose it's a bit much to ask that Biggins will retract his statements from a blog post; "the thick-headed gob****es of the Irish state insisted that there was no way this was going to happen or was even been considered. " :pac:
The ill informed ramblings like the above were typical of the statements of anti Lisbon people about the position of President of the European Council. FUD.

Scofflaw

Yup - Blair was just another No side bogeyman, really.

cordially,
Scofflaw

meglome

Dinner wrote: »

I agree. It's just unfortunate that some people were intent on blowing it all out of proportion to try to garner support for their own agenda. I suppose it's a bit much to ask that Biggins will retract his statements from a blog post; "the thick-headed gob****es of the Irish state insisted that there was no way this was going to happen or was even been considered. " :pac:
The ill informed ramblings like the above were typical of the statements of anti Lisbon people about the position of President of the European Council. FUD.

Scofflaw wrote: »

Yup - Blair was just another No side bogeyman, really.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Agree and agree.

I wonder will Biggins also retract his sig "Tony Blair WILL get to bark orders at Ireland as he becomes EU president next month!"

ConsiderThis

i suppose, stepping back and looking at how our new "president of the council" Herman Van Rompuy, the Belgian Prime Minister, and "EU High Representative" for Baroness Ashton, are appointed, one is not exactly filled with much confidence.

Both the individuals are seem to be unknown quantities and appointed more for political expediency than anything else, a stitch up between the other leaders. How democratic is that.

"We've ended up with two garden gnomes" a government minister is reported as saying.

ei.sdraob

ConsiderThis wrote: »

i suppose, stepping back and looking at how our new "president of the council" Herman Van Rompuy, the Belgian Prime Minister, and "EU High Representative" for Baroness Ashton, are appointed, one is not exactly filled with much confidence.

Both the individuals are seem to be unknown quantities and appointed more for political expediency than anything else, a stitch up between the other leaders. How democratic is that.

"We've ended up with two garden gnomes" a government minister is reported as saying.

the alternative is a US style presidential election

which is not very democratic thanks to the electoral college system (ahem ahem Bush & Florida) and since EU is not a federal state with centralized control and large presidential power like the US

anyways your whole post is based on wrong premise, since Herman Van Rompuy is no a "leader" (why the obsession with czars/king/dictator strongmen holding power?) but a chairman whose role is to coordinate work of others not rule from the top


the EU system is probably the most democratic system the world has known, be happy and proud of it, but its not without its weaknesses mainly due to the huge amounts of compromises in place to keep everyone happy

realismpol

ei.sdraob wrote: »

the alternative is a US style presidential election

which is not very democratic thanks to the electoral college system (ahem ahem Bush & Florida) and since EU is not a federal state with centralized control and large presidential power like the US

anyways your whole post is based on wrong premise, since Herman Van Rompuy is no a "leader" (why the obsession with czars/king/dictator strongmen holding power?) but a chairman whose role is to coordinate work of others not rule from the top


the EU system is probably the most democratic system the world has known, be happy and proud of it, but its not without its weaknesses mainly due to the huge amounts of compromises in place to keep everyone happy

Democratic? You having a laugh surely. At least in the united states people get a say in who they elect even if the electoral system over there has its flaws.

These apparent unknowns are now bascially representing 360 million people and speaking for them. The average joe soap in europe has no clue who these 2 people are, never got a say in wheither they wanted to vote for them. The entire system is corrupt. The whole nwo thing seemed farcical until you actually start to see elements of it unfold before your very eyes. These people have bought and paid off entire government representatives in europe and our own government have no doubt to gain what they really want which is total control. Who is that woman? Apparently a former baroness in the u.k with next to no political experience whom nobody ever heard of. These are the people really pulling the strings of the governments. Large coroporations and ultra wealthy royalists. Have no doubt about that. The goverment here and elsewhere have long long been paid off. Just like we seen the other night with france ireland the corporations are running the show.

This is very very worrisome and just like i predicted after they bullied the irish people into voting for lisbon the true agenda is now being seen by all.


I doubt the average minister in ireland or elsewhere even knows who these people are. Whats scarey about all this is that we are seeing no greater democracy but the actual death of it. The introduction of the national id card yesterday in britain points to where all this is really going.

ConsiderThis

ei.sdraob wrote: »

the alternative is a US style presidential election

which is not very democratic thanks to the electoral college system (ahem ahem Bush & Florida) and since EU is not a federal state with centralized control and large presidential power like the US

anyways your whole post is based on wrong premise, since Herman Van Rompuy is no a "leader" (why the obsession with czars/king/dictator strongmen holding power?) but a chairman whose role is to coordinate work of others not rule from the top


the EU system is probably the most democratic system the world has known, be happy and proud of it, but its not without its weaknesses mainly due to the huge amounts of compromises in place to keep everyone happy

I actually laughed out loud and had to re read your last paragraph where you claim the EU system is "probably" the most democratic system the world has known. I am reminded that the Soviet Union used also to make similar claims, and how someone can claim that a political stitch up (as we've just had to appoint our president of the council and EU High Representative), is more democratic than countries where their presidents are elected by actual elections, seems uncertain.

Dinner

ConsiderThis wrote: »

(as we've just had to appoint our president of the council and EU High Representative), is more democratic than countries where their presidents are elected by actual elections, seems uncertain.

You do realise that there is a difference between the job of Herman Van Rompuy and Barack Obama, right?

The actual decisions of the EU are made by the elected heads of governments of each member country, not by the President of the European Council. Why would I want or need to vote for someone to fill that position, it has very little power other than chairing and organising meetings and the occasional meeting with another head of government. Better that than 27 heads of government flying out to have a chat with other leaders. Van Rompuy has no authority on decisions other than those which the members of the council tell him to make.

Obama has ultimate authority in his position. He makes the final decisions.

And to even try to compare Obama's position with Van Rompuy is dishonest and misleading at the very least.

I think you have misrepresented ei.sdraob's post. My reading of it was that the EU system, whereby a council of 27 people make all the big decisions is more democratic than the US system where, ultimatly, one person does it.

ConsiderThis

Dinner wrote: »

You do realise that there is a difference between the job of Herman Van Rompuy and Barack Obama, right?

The actual decisions of the EU are made by the elected heads of governments of each member country, not by the President of the European Council. Why would I want or need to vote for someone to fill that position, it has very little power other than chairing and organising meetings and the occasional meeting with another head of government. Better that than 27 heads of government flying out to have a chat with other leaders. Van Rompuy has no authority on decisions other than those which the members of the council tell him to make.

Obama has ultimate authority in his position. He makes the final decisions.

And to even try to compare Obama's position with Van Rompuy is dishonest and misleading at the very least.

I think you have misrepresented ei.sdraob's post. My reading of it was that the EU system, whereby a council of 27 people make all the big decisions is more democratic than the US system where, ultimatly, one person does it.

I didn't mention Obama!

Dinner

ConsiderThis wrote: »

I didn't mention Obama!

You're right, you didn't. You mentioned "than countries where their presidents are elected by actual elections, seems uncertain."

I made the jump from 'president' to Obama. I presume then that you refered to a figurehead president like McAleese?

In which case, apologies, I got carried away. However I still don't believe its a fair comparison to compare even a figurehead president to Van Rumpoy as their jobs are still miles apart. Van Rumpoy is elected by the Council to, effectivly, run the council.

The benefit of having McAleese elected by the people is that part of her job is to sign bills into law and to decide whether to kick it on to the courts to have it constitutionality assessed. Which is a very important part of a democracy. Van Rumpoy won't have that sort of responsibility. And I also question the entire concept of Van Rumpoy being 'our president', although the media isn't and won't help matters by continuely refering to him as 'EU President' and 'Our President' (I'm looking at you, Sky News!). He looks after and represents the decisions and authority European Council, not a whole lot more.

ConsiderThis

Dinner wrote: »

You're right, you didn't. You mentioned "than countries where their presidents are elected by actual elections, seems uncertain."

I made the jump from 'president' to Obama. I presume then that you refered to a figurehead president like McAleese?

In which case, apologies, I got carried away. However I still don't believe its a fair comparison to compare even a figurehead president to Van Rumpoy as their jobs are still miles apart. Van Rumpoy is elected by the Council to, effectivly, run the council.

The benefit of having McAleese elected by the people is that part of her job is to sign bills into law and to decide whether to kick it on to the courts to have it constitutionality assessed. Which is a very important part of a democracy. Van Rumpoy won't have that sort of responsibility. And I also question the entire concept of Van Rumpoy being 'our president', although the media isn't and won't help matters by continuely refering to him as 'EU President' and 'Our President' (I'm looking at you, Sky News!). He looks after and represents the decisions and authority European Council, not a whole lot more.

What I was thinking of was the two types of head of state; those like The Queen , or our President who are titular heads of state with little or no actual power, and executive heads of state (American president, Zimbabwean president, RSA President, who have considerable power.

The EU President of the Council seems to fall in between two stools, as it were. The office appears to have executive powers to act on behalf of the EU on the international stage, but also he is not head, or president, of the EU.

Having said that, the role will, as all roles do, change over time. In the hands of a skilful political operator like, for example, Blair, there is little doubt that he would have strutted the world stage, probably presenting himself as president of Europe, or even referring to himself as "the President". I suppose what will be interesting will be to watch the role over the coming years and see what it becomes.

What made me laugh about the other post was the claim that the EU "...the most democratic system the world has known..." which seems quite a claim, especially after the denial of referendums to all the people in 26 out of 27 countries over the important Lisbon treaty, and the fact that the politicians, who are the only people we can vote for at a european level, are not even allowed to initiate legislation!

Dinner

ConsiderThis wrote: »

What I was thinking of was the two types of head of state; those like The Queen , or our President who are titular heads of state with little or no actual power, and executive heads of state (American president, Zimbabwean president, RSA President, who have considerable power.

The EU President of the Council seems to fall in between two stools, as it were. The office appears to have executive powers to act on behalf of the EU on the international stage, but also he is not head, or president, of the EU.

I see where you're coming from, but I'd disagree. It has far far less power than an executive head of state like Obama. But it also has a bit less power than McAleese who can ask the courts to examine legislation and must sign it into law. Pres. of the Council can't do anything like that. The only thing he can do is what the Council members strictly allow him to do. He will represent the views of the Council abroad, not his own. Thats not really a whole lot of power.

ConsiderThis wrote: »

Having said that, the role will, as all roles do, change over time. In the hands of a skilful political operator like, for example, Blair, there is little doubt that he would have strutted the world stage, probably presenting himself as president of Europe, or even referring to himself as "the President". I suppose what will be interesting will be to watch the role over the coming years and see what it becomes.

The Council members seem to have made their views clear as to what they want in a council president. They want someone who will run the council and run it well, who will assist them in reaching consensus and who will make the EU look dignified on the world stage. I can't see members of the council deciding in 2.5 years that they'd rather have an outspoken and controversial President who might only make trouble for them.

ConsiderThis wrote: »

What made me laugh about the other post was the claim that the EU "...the most democratic system the world has known..." which seems quite a claim, especially after the denial of referendums to all the people in 26 out of 27 countries over the important Lisbon treaty,

That has nothing to do with the EU. Thats down to each countries, leaders, parliments and constitutions.

ConsiderThis wrote: »

and the fact that the politicians, who are the only people we can vote for at a european level, are not even allowed to initiate legislation!

Well the citizens initiative might help this a bit by forcing the Commission to discuss an idea. If it is a good idea, then I don't think the Commission would mind initiating legislation on it. I'm not entirely convinced that allowing the Parliment to initiate legislation would be all that good an idea. It just seems 'messy' or something. And for the moment I'm happy enough for them to keep an eye on what the Commission is doing and vote on any legislation.

namloc1980

realismpol wrote: »

Democratic? You having a laugh surely. At least in the united states people get a say in who they elect even if the electoral system over there has its flaws.

These apparent unknowns are now bascially representing 360 million people and speaking for them. The average joe soap in europe has no clue who these 2 people are, never got a say in wheither they wanted to vote for them. The entire system is corrupt. The whole nwo thing seemed farcical until you actually start to see elements of it unfold before your very eyes. These people have bought and paid off entire government representatives in europe and our own government have no doubt to gain what they really want which is total control. Who is that woman? Apparently a former baroness in the u.k with next to no political experience whom nobody ever heard of. These are the people really pulling the strings of the governments. Large coroporations and ultra wealthy royalists. Have no doubt about that. The goverment here and elsewhere have long long been paid off. Just like we seen the other night with france ireland the corporations are running the show.

Why exactly would you want to vote for someone in a position that has exactly Zero executive powers?? I'd imagine the voter turnout would be pathetically low. This is how representative democracy works...you don't get to elect the Taoiseach or the Minister for Forgeign Affairs in this country. The power in the EU has always been and will remain with the European Council not some figurehead. Nothing in Lisbon changes that fact.

realismpol wrote: »

This is very very worrisome and just like i predicted after they bullied the irish people into voting for lisbon the true agenda is now being seen by all.

And what would that be? They appointed a President of the Council and Foreign Representative....nothing sinister here....this stuff was actually in the Treaty!

realismpol wrote: »

I doubt the average minister in ireland or elsewhere even knows who these people are. Whats scarey about all this is that we are seeing no greater democracy but the actual death of it. The introduction of the national id card yesterday in britain points to where all this is really going.

I'd imagine that Sarkozy and Merkel etc. wouldn't want a strong personality in these positions such as Blair as it would overshadow themselves. BTW how the President of the Council was appointed on Thursday is infinitely more democratic than the system that has been there previously.

View

Dinner wrote: »

Van Rumpoy won't have that sort of responsibility. And I also question the entire concept of Van Rumpoy being 'our president', although the media isn't and won't help matters by continuely refering to him as 'EU President' and 'Our President' (I'm looking at you, Sky News!). He looks after and represents the decisions and authority European Council, not a whole lot more.

The role would appear to be shaping up more as the "Speaker" of the European Council than as the fantastical "EU President" dreamed up by the English media. As such, just like his comparable "Speaker" in the European Parliament - i.e. the President of the European Parliament - the role involves moving the agenda along (i.e. driving business) and politically representing the institution, just as Parliamentary Speakers do world-wide on a regular basis.

utick

View wrote: »

The role would appear to be shaping up more as the "Speaker" of the European Council .

why are they paying 350,000 a year for just a speaker, no wonder people are talking about waste in eu politics

ejmaztec

I think that Andrew Neil of the BBC This Week programme was correct at the start, in his assumption that the most insignifant person (he even mentioned Rompuy)would get the job. Had some high profile person like Blair been chosen, they would have been looking for more power than the job originally entailed. This would have gradually happened aftert a long-drawn out slanging match.

As was also predicted, the final outcome was a Franco-German stitch-up.

The funniest part of the fiasco was that Gordon Brown, even though he knew that Tony Blair was definitely not going to get the job, continued to canvas for him. I think that he did this, knowing that Tony Blair would scuttle away red-faced with his tail between his legs after Rompuy got it.

We'll see soon enough whether or not Merkel and Sarkozy made the right decision, or whether they've shot themselves in the feet.

View

utick wrote: »

why are they paying 350,000 a year for just a speaker, no wonder people are talking about waste in eu politics

Speakers are regarded as being very senior posts in most democracies. Very few states would take the view that someone is "just a speaker". If anything, the role of Ceann Comhairle is considerable downplayed in Ireland which is a bit odd.

As for the salary you mention, I have no idea about it. The source -from a Google search - appears to be Open Europe, which based on past performance are about as reliable for objective analysis of EU affairs as the North Korean news is for stock market analysis.

Then again maybe it goes back to the days when Bertie Ahern was being touted as a potential President. They might have heard what our Taoisigh earn and decided to top it!