What do you think about this Juncker Fellow who wants to be head of the EU ?

ewan whose army

There is a crisis in the EU at the moment surrounding the rumoured appointment of a federalist ex Luxembourg politician as head of the commission.

With the results of the EU election showing that people don't want a federal Europe its a really unwise decision opposed by the UK, Denmark, Sweden, Hungary etc. but it is also the fact of his colourful history when we was once ousted for some incredibly dodgy dealing with some form of spying scandal!

Being not completely ignorant of EU politics I specifically didn't give Fine Gael my first preference because of the European People's Party endorsement of him, I think he is very dangerous to Europe in a way.

comongethappy

I assume the other parties will form a grand coalition in the parliament around the centre left candidate (so long as the Green & Communist /Far left candidates are amenable).

That's if they are smart of course.

sock puppet

comongethappy wrote: »

I assume the other parties will form a grand coalition in the parliament around the centre left candidate (so long as the Green & Communist /Far left candidates are amenable).

That's if they are smart of course.

If it were left up to the parliament Juncker would be a cert. The socialists have already backed him. It's the national leaders who don't want him.

comongethappy

sock puppet wrote: »

If it were left up to the parliament Juncker would be a cert. The socialists have already backed him. It's the national leaders who don't want him.

Aah.... Sorry, I thought he was just backed by the centre right EPP.

I suppose its a result of treaty changes to help improve the EUs democratic deficit.
The parliament elects now, rather than just approve.

Riskymove

comongethappy wrote: »

Aah.... Sorry, I thought he was just backed by the centre right EPP.

Junker IS the candidate of the right not the left

Amirani

ewan whose army wrote: »

With the results of the EU election showing that people don't want a federal Europe its a really unwise decision opposed by the UK, Denmark, Sweden, Hungary etc. but it is also the fact of his colourful history when we was once ousted for some incredibly dodgy dealing with some form of spying scandal!

I'm not entirely sure how you've taken the EU elections results as showing the people don't want a federal Europe. Euro-sceptic MEPs are still very much a minority, and a lot of their support came from national problems rather than EU issues.

People may not want a federal Europe, but you really can't say that on the basis of these election results alone.

ewan whose army

Diego Simeone wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure how you've taken the EU elections results as showing the people don't want a federal Europe. Euro-sceptic MEPs are still very much a minority, and a lot of their support came from national problems rather than EU issues.

People may not want a federal Europe, but you really can't say that on the basis of these election results alone.

No I was also basing it on the Eurobarometer survey.

Scofflaw

ewan whose army wrote: »

There is a crisis in the EU at the moment surrounding the rumoured appointment of a federalist ex Luxembourg politician as head of the commission.

With the results of the EU election showing that people don't want a federal Europe its a really unwise decision opposed by the UK, Denmark, Sweden, Hungary etc. but it is also the fact of his colourful history when we was once ousted for some incredibly dodgy dealing with some form of spying scandal!

Being not completely ignorant of EU politics I specifically didn't give Fine Gael my first preference because of the European People's Party endorsement of him, I think he is very dangerous to Europe in a way.

I'll be interested to see how this all plays out. As far as I can see, the Parliament is willing to push pretty hard here - their statement supporting Juncker came out very quickly, and they made sure their line was visible before the Council meeting later that day.

I don't think Juncker would have much chance to push the EU in a federalist direction as head of the Commission (not "head of the EU", there still really isn't such a position). The Commission doesn't write treaties, and whoever heads it, they're bound by the treaties as written by the Member States and interpreted by the CJEU, so there's not really all that much room to press things one way or the other.

Either way, though, if the majority of the Parliament endorse him, it's hard to argue that he lacks legitimacy, whether one agrees with his principles or not.

No I was also basing it on the Eurobarometer survey.

Which bit, though? The current low values of trust, or the rather high values for 'more Europe' in specific policy areas such as foreign policy or common defence?

cordially,
Scofflaw

View

ewan whose army wrote: »

There is a crisis in the EU at the moment surrounding the rumoured appointment of a federalist ex Luxembourg politician as head of the commission.

Offhand, I don't recall any particular evidence that Juncker is a federalist. Use of the term is probably just an excuse by the UK to try and block him from the position and I suspect that arises because the UK fundamentally disagrees with there being a direct link between the EP elections and the nomination and election of the Comission President.

Lastly, I don't think there is a "crisis" about it, although mind you, based on the media, the EU only has two operational modes: 1) crisis mode where the EU is on the verge of breaking up, and, 2) immediate post-crisis relief mode where everyone has a short pause before waiting on tenterhooks for the next crisis to break. :-)

ewan whose army

Scofflaw wrote: »

]


Which bit, though? The current low values of trust, or the rather high values for 'more Europe' in specific policy areas such as foreign policy or common defence?

cordially,
Scofflaw

The future of Europe report

There is strong support (69% of respondents) for the President of the European
Commission being elected directly by EU citizens.

So people think that Juncker should be directly elected, A belief that I identify with

Europeans are divided about the creation of an EU army (46% in
favour, 47% opposed).

So no majority, however I don't see the point or the practicalities of this working, the bigger EU armies are already unified in a way under NATO so its kinda redundant, this survey was done before ukraine kicked off so it would be interesting to see this now. I know in the UK it would get vetoed after Iraq the folks don't want young people being sent off to die in another country's war.

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_413_en.pdf

ewan whose army

View wrote: »

Offhand, I don't recall any particular evidence that Juncker is a federalist. Use of the term is probably just an excuse by the UK to try and block him from the position and I suspect that arises because the UK fundamentally disagrees with there being a direct link between the EP elections and the nomination and election of the Comission President.

Lastly, I don't think there is a "crisis" about it, although mind you, based on the media, the EU only has two operational modes: 1) crisis mode where the EU is on the verge of breaking up, and, 2) immediate post-crisis relief mode where everyone has a short pause before waiting on tenterhooks for the next crisis to break. :-)

Apparently he is a self declared advocate for a "united states of Europe"

Scofflaw

ewan whose army wrote: »

The future of Europe report


So people think that Juncker should be directly elected, A belief that I identify with

We might get there yet, although the first hurdle to cross is that any kind of election (other than the national elections) should have any bearing on the post. I don't know whether "directly elected" to some people would also cover the current attempt to have the Parliamentary groups dictate the candidates to the Member States.

ewan whose army wrote: »

So no majority, however I don't see the point or the practicalities of this working, the bigger EU armies are already unified in a way under NATO so its kinda redundant, this survey was done before ukraine kicked off so it would be interesting to see this now. I know in the UK it would get vetoed after Iraq the folks don't want young people being sent off to die in another country's war.

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_413_en.pdf

Common defence would probably get vetoed (we're obviously against it), but that doesn't mean there's no support for it around Europe. And, looking at the report, there's also solid support for "more Europe" in other categories such as tackling unemployment and protecting the environment. So I think the point stands that when you say that people don't want "more Europe" it's not a very useful claim, because in some areas people are willing to see more Europe - and the addition of specific areas of competence is, after all, how "more Europe" happens.

That's not to contend that Junker's federalism isn't a very minority opinion. It's just that the obverse of his opinion is not that no further integration happens.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

Hmm. Looks like Cameron's sort of kicking it up a notch:

British Prime Minister David Cameron has warned that his country could leave the European Union if Luxembourg's former premier Jean-Claude Juncker became the next European Commission president, Der Spiegel reported.

http://news.yahoo.com/cameron-warns-britain-could-quit-eu-juncker-gets-170640798.html

Well, the language is perhaps a little over-dramatic, since it suggests Cameron said "it's Juncker or the UK", when what he is supposed to have said is:

Cameron reportedly told Merkel that picking Juncker for the job would "destabilise his government to such a point that it would bring forward a referendum on whether to exit the EU" -- a move which is likely to result in a popular consensus to leave the bloc.

Given that one of the coalition parties opposes a referendum, I'm not sure how exactly that's supposed to work. Bringing forward a referendum certainly wouldn't help stabilise his government. Does he mean it could cause the government to fall, triggering a general election and thereby, in the event of a Tory win, bringing forward the promised referendum?

Or is this Cameron simply wielding whatever stick he thinks he has?

Disclaimer: I don't think a lot of David Cameron, who I think is one of the weakest Tory leaders of recent times.

cordially,
Scofflaw

ewan whose army

Scofflaw wrote: »

We might get there yet, although the first hurdle to cross is that any kind of election (other than the national elections) should have any bearing on the post. I don't know whether "directly elected" to some people would also cover the current attempt to have the Parliamentary groups dictate the candidates to the Member States.



Common defence would probably get vetoed (we're obviously against it), but that doesn't mean there's no support for it around Europe. And, looking at the report, there's also solid support for "more Europe" in other categories such as tackling unemployment and protecting the environment. So I think the point stands that when you say that people don't want "more Europe" it's not a very useful claim, because in some areas people are willing to see more Europe - and the addition of specific areas of competence is, after all, how "more Europe" happens.

That's not to contend that Junker's federalism isn't a very minority opinion. It's just that the obverse of his opinion is not that no further integration happens.

cordially,
Scofflaw

It depends on what you define as Federal.

I go by the US definition of states with self governance however international affairs, citizenship and military are handled by a super-government so we would all be EU citizens (not Irish or British etc. anymore) etc.

A closer union does not necessary equal a federal nation.

ewan whose army

Scofflaw wrote: »

Hmm. Looks like Cameron's sort of kicking it up a notch:



http://news.yahoo.com/cameron-warns-britain-could-quit-eu-juncker-gets-170640798.html

Well, the language is perhaps a little over-dramatic, since it suggests Cameron said "it's Juncker or the UK", when what he is supposed to have said is:



Given that one of the coalition parties opposes a referendum, I'm not sure how exactly that's supposed to work. Bringing forward a referendum certainly wouldn't help stabilise his government. Does he mean it could cause the government to fall, triggering a general election and thereby, in the event of a Tory win, bringing forward the promised referendum?

Or is this Cameron simply wielding whatever stick he thinks he has?

Disclaimer: I don't think a lot of David Cameron, who I think is one of the weakest Tory leaders of recent times.

cordially,
Scofflaw

He has a point, the German press took it out of context. It will give UKIP reams of propaganda, and since someone like Farage will be the anti-christ to Juncker it could get very very messy.

This will just play into UKIPs hands, its why myself as a "Europhile scum" (a label given to me when I told a UKIP person to go away when I was in the UK) is worried by what Juncker will get up to.

Scofflaw

ewan whose army wrote: »

He has a point, the German press took it out of context. It will give UKIP reams of propaganda, and since someone like Farage will be the anti-christ to Juncker it could get very very messy.

This will just play into UKIPs hands, its why myself as a "Europhile scum" (a label given to me when I told a UKIP person to go away when I was in the UK) is worried by what Juncker will get up to.

Which is to say - and I'm not disagreeing with your point at all - this is David Cameron saying "my leadership of my party is so weak, and I am so utterly lacking in an effective response to UKIP, that merely by being in the role Juncker's federalism will force me to play the only card I've ever been able to think of to combat UKIP".

cordially,
Scofflaw

sock puppet

I don't think Juncker has helped himself by his comments. It may not be fair and he may not like it but he needs national leaders' support.

petronius

Juncker can not be EU Head - it would ease the UK exit of Europe.
He is seen as too Federalist and in-house.
I do think it is wrong that UK, Germany, Holland and Sweden P.M.s meet and seem to decide who will be the EU Head..

comongethappy

petronius wrote: »

Juncker can not be EU Head - it would ease the UK exit of Europe.
He is seen as too Federalist and in-house.
I do think it is wrong that UK, Germany, Holland and Sweden P.M.s meet and seem to decide who will be the EU Head..

Did these leaders not agree that in the interest of reducing the 'democratic deficit' this role be decided by parliament?

No point subverting that just because you don't like the result.

And its not like he can force ever greater union.

Fratton Fred

Seems like Cameron is opposed to the process to select him as much as anything.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/invented-process-to-appoint-president-of-european-commission-is-damaging-to-democracy-1.1830355

Scofflaw

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Seems like Cameron is opposed to the process to select him as much as anything.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/invented-process-to-appoint-president-of-european-commission-is-damaging-to-democracy-1.1830355

Heh.

David Cameron wrote:

Most Europeans did not vote in the European Parliament elections. Turnout declined in the majority of member states.

Not actually true, but eh, cheap shot.

David Cameron wrote:

Those who voted did so to choose their MEP, not the commission president. Mr Juncker did not stand anywhere and was not elected by anyone.

So...the Commission President should instead be chosen by back-room dealings between the national governments, from people who have never had to express an interest in the post? That would be more democratic than choosing someone who at least stood up publicly and offered themselves as the chosen candidate of a particular EP group?

I'd be very interested to hear a good defence of this reasoning by someone who has a high opinion of Mr Cameron...but I fear I'll be waiting for the historical revisionists to get going in twenty years or so.

cordially,
Scofflaw

comongethappy

Heard on the news that at this weeks EU summit, Dave™ Cameron's dreams have come true.

He could fine himself being the only leader voting against Junker.

Seeing as his episode over Junker is just playing to the UKIP gallery, Dave™ couldn't have hoped for a better outcome.
He, standing alone, against the hoards of eurocrats, just aching to straighten bananas & take jobs.

No doubt the Tory press are giddy with anticipation!

Nodin

"EU leaders in Brussels have nominated former Luxembourg PM Jean-Claude Juncker to be president of the European Commission, in a blow to the UK.

Prime Minister David Cameron called it "a serious mistake". "This is going to be a long, tough fight," he said.

He had pushed for a vote on Mr Juncker - breaking with tradition - and 26 out of 28 countries backed him.

Only Mr Cameron and Hungarian PM Viktor Orban voted against him. Mr Juncker is also likely to win a vote by Euro MPs."
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-28049375

A mistake allright. Cameron seems to have this knack of starting an issue, then isolating himself.

Nodin

comongethappy wrote: »

Heard on the news that at this weeks EU summit, Dave™ Cameron's dreams have come true.

He could fine himself being the only leader voting against Junker.

Seeing as his episode over Junker is just playing to the UKIP gallery, Dave™ couldn't have hoped for a better outcome.
He, standing alone, against the hoards of eurocrats, just aching to straighten bananas & take jobs.

No doubt the Tory press are giddy with anticipation!

'Junkers over London' etc They'll probably ignore the "c".

oscarBravo

The coverage on Newsnight was just weird. All the talk of Britain having to protect itself from the threat of further EU integration.

Um... if you don't want further integration, don't ratify any more treaties. Duh.

sock puppet

Scofflaw wrote: »

So...the Commission President should instead be chosen by back-room dealings between the national governments, from people who have never had to express an interest in the post? That would be more democratic than choosing someone who at least stood up publicly and offered themselves as the chosen candidate of a particular EP group?

I'd be very interested to hear a good defence of this reasoning by someone who has a high opinion of Mr Cameron...but I fear I'll be waiting for the historical revisionists to get going in twenty years or so.

cordially,
Scofflaw

In fairness, from reading the papers this morning is seems that Cameron was offered a top Commision post if he supported Juncker, while it's unlikely that any Italian will get one of the top jobs because they already have Draghi. So I highly doubt Juncker's appointment will see the end of backroom dealing and horse trading.

Lou.m

oscarBravo wrote: »

The coverage on Newsnight was just weird. All the talk of Britain having to protect itself from the threat of further EU integration.

Um... if you don't want further integration, don't ratify any more treaties. Duh.

The British Govt has consistently lied to it's people and sold the line that it is the EU enforcing when actually it has been successive British govts legally consenting and being very quiet about it.

Most people in the UK have no real understanding that their govt is the one consenting and are under the impression it is a runaway train scenario with bureaucrats in Brussels doing magic.

The British govt has usually seen the benefits of ratifying the treaties and wished to give some or all of the flack to the great OZ or EU.

Many in British govt would love top EU jobs.

comongethappy

oscarBravo wrote: »

The coverage on Newsnight was just weird. All the talk of Britain having to protect itself from the threat of further EU integration.

Um... if you don't want further integration, don't ratify any more treaties. Duh.

The hypocracy of the Tories is flabbergasting.
All integration was by choice.
No treaty could pass without unanimous backing.

The naked localism and fear of the UKIP/Daily Mail axis of evil will just damage the UK people in the long term.

It looks like Dave prefers to harm Britain to save his own skin.

P_1

I'm finding Cameron's views rather undemocratic and they strike me as being nothing more than an easily seen through counter to UKIP.

One thing I do think though is that the head of the Commission should either
a)be selected from the pool of sitting MEPs (like how a Taoiseach or PM is elected) or
b)be elected in a presidential style election

Having the head of the Commission come from the recommendation of the Parliament is good for reducing the democratic deficit but it doesn't quite go all the way in my eyes.

Scofflaw

P_1 wrote: »

I'm finding Cameron's views rather undemocratic and they strike me as being nothing more than an easily seen through counter to UKIP.

One thing I do think though is that the head of the Commission should either
a)be selected from the pool of sitting MEPs (like how a Taoiseach or PM is elected) or
b)be elected in a presidential style election

Having the head of the Commission come from the recommendation of the Parliament is good for reducing the democratic deficit but it doesn't quite go all the way in my eyes.

While we assume that being personally elected is pretty much a self-evident prerequisite of someone having a democratic mandate, only ourselves and the UK of all EU countries have that requirement. The others appear to think that the ability to get elected and the ability to do the job once elected can be separated...

cordially,
Scofflaw

P_1

Scofflaw wrote: »

While we assume that being personally elected is pretty much a self-evident prerequisite of someone having a democratic mandate, only ourselves and the UK of all EU countries have that requirement. The others appear to think that the ability to get elected and the ability to do the job once elected can be separated...

cordially,
Scofflaw

That's quite true (trying to remember my comparative politics classes from college here). Am I correct in thinking that the list system of elections is preferred in the continental EU? I guess the manner of Juncker's election would mirror that system.

Now of course I could be talking right out of my backside here so apologies if I've made any glaring generalisations/errors.

Lou.m

Well he got it anyway ..so we shall see more of him.