Junker wants all EU countries to be in Eurozone and Schengen

recedite

breatheme wrote: »

There's nothing the Irish public can do? The Irish public can lobby their MEPs with the rest of the EU public, if they truly felt there was a reason to dismiss Juncker.
This has in practice never happened, but the European Parliament once threatened to use this power and before they did so the entire commission resigned. Reminder: MEPs are directly elected.

Sure, there have been frequent power struggles and spats in Brussels between the E Parliament and the E Commission. But the general public are not involved, and do not feel they have any input into these.
The chain of influence is too long and disjointed.

You know if you are underwater that you can breathe easily enough through a short straw to the surface, so you might think you should also be able to breathe through a long hosepipe. But no, "in practice this has never happened" successfully.
(thought you might appreciate that, with your username )

breatheme

recedite wrote: »

breatheme wrote: »

There's nothing the Irish public can do? The Irish public can lobby their MEPs with the rest of the EU public, if they truly felt there was a reason to dismiss Juncker.
This has in practice never happened, but the European Parliament once threatened to use this power and before they did so the entire commission resigned. Reminder: MEPs are directly elected.

Sure, there have been frequent power struggles and spats in Brussels between the E Parliament and the E Commission. But the general public are not involved, and do not feel they have any input into these.
The chain of influence is too long and disjointed.

Feeling like they have no input and actually having no input are different things. In order to fix this, European civics and politics should be taught in schools.

You know if you are underwater that you can breathe easily enough through a short straw to the surface, so you might think you should also be able to breathe through a long hosepipe. But no, "in practice this has never happened" successfully.

Again, in practice it hasn't happened because when there seemed like there was a need for it, the Commission resigned before the vote of no confidence, so the straw is actually longer than you think.
(thought you might appreciate that, with your username )

Answers in bold, and yes, I did appreciate it

Peregrinus

Gringo180 wrote: »

How many Irish citizens knew who Juncker was before he became the leader of the EU? Not many I would guess . . .

Juncker is not "the leader of the EU"; he is the President of the European Commission, a position to which he was elected by the European Parliament. He was a well-known figure on the European political scene for many years before becoming President of the Commission. I doubt very much that "not many" Irish citizens knew who he was and, for those who hadn't heard of him, this can only be because they took no interest in European affairs.

Which, of course, is their perfect right. But the fact that they make this choice is no reflection on Juncker.

View

Juncker secured the backing of the EPP to be their candidate for the position of Commission President - their “Spitzenkanditat” - at an EPP party convention that was held in Dublin in March 2014. That was reported in both our domestic media and those of other member states at the time.

Subsequent to that there were televised leadership debates between the various Spitzenkanditaten. These were transmitted and reported on in many other EU member states.

They were, however, largely ignored by our domestic media though as they, as usual,
focused on (the personalities of) our domestic candidates, rather than the policies of the parties they would be members of in the EP. That though is hardly an EU fault but one due to the focus of our domestic media & politics. It is, I believe, caused by our unnecessary use of candidate focused PR-STV for the European elections, rather than one of the party focused open or closed PR list systems which are used by the other member states.

recedite

View wrote: »

It is, I believe, caused by our unnecessary use of candidate focused PR-STV for the European elections, rather than one of the party focused open or closed PR list systems which are used by the other member states.

Good point re the type of people we are sending as MEPs. Ming Flanagan for example hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of influencing overall EU policy re the conservation of protected habitats and bogs. There is a slight chance that he could influence the implementation of EU directives at national level, but to do that he should be a TD and not an MEP.
I wouldn't blame the STV vote system though. We should have a national list system with a selection of candidates/parties for both the EU and the national elections, while retaining the STV.

Jim2007

recedite wrote: »

We should have a national list system with a selection of candidates/parties for both the EU and the national elections, while retaining the STV.

Absolutely not! The whole point is to represent the people of a locality, not the nation. You can not for instance have a situation where say 90% of the candidates elected where from the north west of the country, 1% in Dublin, 9% in Limerick and the rest of the country without representation.

murphaph

Gotta say I also favour a national list (as is the case in the Netherlands) for Dail elections or at least 2 votes (one direct candidate from the constituency, one from a national list, as is the case in Germany). I find politics far too local in Ireland. The Dail is an overgrown council chamber IMO. The eye gets taken off the national ball far too often.

I strongly dislike the STV because it means you need multi-seat constituencies, which leads to an extremely local form of politics whereby the local issues are fought over, rather than national issues being the focus.

View

A number of points.

PR-STV puts an emphasis on the candidates, not on the parties & their policies as a PR list system does.

This means the debate is frequently about which person from party X should be elected, not about whether it should be a person from party X or one from party Y.

There is also unquestionably a tendency in our voting that people use their transfers vote for the local candidates, even when those candidates are from completely opposing parties.

In the context of the EP, MEPs are not there to “deliver goodies” for their locality (they can’t even if they want to do so), but, rather they are legislators selected by the people of a constituency to exercise their judgment as they see fit. In the EP context that means largely in line with their parties.

There is no requirement for the EP as to the size of a constituency so long as it is multi-seat. A single Irish constituency is just as valid a choice as multiple smaller ones.
Indeed a single seat might make sense when we already see ridiculous ones such as “Midlands-North-West”, and it is possibly we might eventually end up with just two constituencies - Dublin & “Everywhere Else that isn’t in Dublin”.

Lastly, this could only be applied easily to EP elections, rather than local or nationals ones as it would require a referendum to change from PR-STV for those elections.

recedite

View wrote: »

PR-STV puts an emphasis on the candidates, not on the parties & their policies as a PR list system does.

That is not in itself a bad thing though. For example I have an option to vote for Stephen Donnelly TD but most of you don't, even though he is reasonably well known around the country because he tends to have strong opinions on national issues.
As a further complication, the guy switched from Social Democrats to FF since the last election. So when the next election comes around I think most of his votes will switch party, as opposed to him attracting party votes. Perhaps he will also lose some votes due to people refusing to vote FF.

IMO it is legitimate to vote for a candidate as opposed to a party. And also there is nothing unusual in giving your second preference to a candidate from a different party, while skipping over the running mate of your first preference. That is actually one of the great things about the STV.

Another example; years ago there was an electoral battle between well known politicians Gormley of the Greens and Mac Dowell of the PDs. Both of these were quality politicians (one right wing and one left wing) but only one could win because they were both based around Sandymount in South Dublin. A lot of people around the country would have rated either of these well known TDs in the Dail as equal to ten back bench cute hoors from FF or FG, but the opportunity to vote for them was not available to anyone outside the constituency.
Ideally then, voters should be able to pick one local and at least one quality national politician from outside their area. It would encourage better quality politicians, and TDs who take an interest in national affairs.

View wrote: »

There is no requirement for the EP as to the size of a constituency so long as it is multi-seat. A single Irish constituency is just as valid a choice as multiple smaller ones.

Good idea, a single constituency would effectively be a national list.

recedite

Jim2007 wrote: »

Absolutely not! The whole point is to represent the people of a locality, not the nation. You can not for instance have a situation where say 90% of the candidates elected where from the north west of the country, 1% in Dublin, 9% in Limerick and the rest of the country without representation.

But if that happened, the rest of the country would be represented, by these TD's of their choosing. It would happen if the northwest had all the best candidates. And then these elected representatives would be free to concentrate on legislation as opposed to helping locals fill in medical card forms or get potholes fixed.

Jim2007

recedite wrote: »

And then these elected representatives would be free to concentrate on legislation as opposed to helping locals fill in medical card forms or get potholes fixed.

But that is what people want, local representation in all issues be it legislation or the pothole outside the door! Have you ever actually spent a campaign on the stump? I've been involved in campaigns since as far back as the 1970s in Donegal, Mayo and in the inner city in Dublin as well as Bern Kanton and City over here, the only difference is language, here I have to argue in German and French. They are just as concerned about getting a pothole fixed over here!

Last year the president of the Federal Council, about the equivalent of a prime minister was a guy from our community and everyone was complaining about how he was not doing enough for the community etc, just like Mayo people were going on about Enda.

A few years a go a friend of mine was at government buildings dropping in his application for Swiss citizenship which normally takes a year to be approved. He happened to meet a local politician who he knew from the football club. The politician took the papers from him, disappeared for a short while, came back and told him he'd have it in a few days and he did.

All politics are local.

Calina

I don't think the voting system here is why the media ignores European political matters. And foreign events in general.

I think a lack of language skills and a greater interest in what happens in English speaking countries contributes. You can see it in coverage of weather events. European weather disasters get far less coverage often than US disasters. In that, yesterday's coverage of the fires in Portugal is unusual but serious and deadly storms in Germany a few weeks ago got comparatively little coverage.

I think the media could do a better job on European political coverage. One thing they could do is recognise that it isn't a distant, specialised niche thing which we are somehow separate to. Better coverage of other EU countries could contribute...

But I don't think they want to. And maybe it is a financial issue.

murphaph

Here in Germany it is very different to CH and Ireland. A lot of people don't know who their constituency MP even is! They are absolutely not really expected to get potholes fixed. People here of course do complain about politicians at a local level. In our town's Facebook page people are always complaining about what the Gemeinde (town council!) spends the money on. I haven't even ever noticed anyone complaining about the equivalent of the county council!

Peregrinus

murphaph wrote: »

Here in Germany it is very different to CH and Ireland. A lot of people don't know who their constituency MP even is! They are absolutely not really expected to get potholes fixed. People here of course do complain about politicians at a local level. In our town's Facebook page people are always complaining about what the Gemeinde (town council!) spends the money on. I haven't even ever noticed anyone complaining about the equivalent of the county council!

But Germany has a strong tradition of decentralised power, with a signficant range of government functions discharged by states, cities and local governments. These agencies don't just spend money handed out by the federal government; they make decisions, set priorities, etc. If the pothole in your street hasn't been fixed, the person you need to be speaking to is someone with a role in, or influence over, your local government. Your federal member of parliament is not in a position to get your pothole fixed, and everybody knows this.

murphaph

Peregrinus wrote: »

But Germany has a strong tradition of decentralised power, with a signficant range of government functions discharged by states, cities and local governments. These agencies don't just spend money handed out by the federal government; they make decisions, set priorities, etc. If the pothole in your street hasn't been fixed, the person you need to be speaking to is someone with a role in, or influence over, your local government. Your federal member of parliament is not in a position to get your pothole fixed, and everybody knows this.

Yeah that's my point. You should not need to go near your TD to get a pothole fixed. It's totally distracting from national and international issues that need to be legislated for.

_Kaiser_

crashadder wrote: »

Nobody wants EU membership in Turkey anyway. not even the ppl who are pro west and against Erdogan. it doesnt make sense anymore. no wonder why UK is leaving and countries like norway and switzerland refused.

Well it looks like Erdogan is trying to force the issue:

Turkey's president Recep Tayyip Erdogan urged European Union leaders to simply say whether they want to accept Turkey as a member or not.

Turkey's decades of efforts to join the 28-member European club seem to be stalled by the government's harsh reaction to a coup attempt last year.

"I would like to hear a clear declaration," Mr Erdogan said on Tuesday during a visit to Poland.
"If you want to accept Turkey, just do it. If you don't want to, just tell that."

So what will the EU say? "Err... maybe later?"

recedite

Erdogan is itching to start the executions of his political prisoners, but he doesn't want to be blamed for ruining Turkey's chances of ever joining the EU.
So he wants the EU to make it clear now that Turkey is never going to be admitted.
Not gonna happen though. The EU leadership will keep stringing the Turks along indefinitely, simply because they haven't got the balls to
a) tell the Turks that most Europeans (and especially Germans) don't want them.
b) do what is necessary to secure the southeastern borders of the EU themselves, as opposed to paying the Turks to stop the unwanted illegal immigrants en route to Europe.

crashadder

but he doesn't want to be blamed for ruining Turkey's chances of ever joining the EU.
So he wants the EU to make it clear now that Turkey is never going to be admitted.

Not exactly true. His voters are already against EU. Nobody would blame him. On the contrary he would be a hero for taking on EU
as per Turkeys admission ;
Although Turkey is a secular country, at the end of the day a muslim country. no matter what they do, they will never be admitted to the EU. Romania Bulgaria Poland, cyprus. I mean seriously :-) They dont exactly meet the requirements do they ? . Its got nothing to do with Erdogan or his administration. Turkey has been waiting to be admitted since 1960s. Only small part of Turkey is actually in Europe. That alone is a very good excuse to deny membership. But for EU Turkey is a large market and protection from middleeast. But i know for a fact that in 3 months refugee deal is off the table. It is going to be messy for sure