Should the EU have a president now?
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Should the EU have a president now?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,193

    Should the EU have a president now?

    Is it the right time for this idea or should member countries wait until the new members have had some time to "acclimatize".
    Trappedagainbyperfectlogic.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    485
    Actually, the EU does have a president at the moment. Each country gets to be the president for 6 months.
    At the moment it is a farce, as the country which holds the presidency just pursues its own national interests.
    So, an elected president to serve for 3 years is probably a good idea.
    Don't think it will make that much difference though ...

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    118
    I think a president is not a solution. I will prefer something like UN. All the countries vote, the majority win (UN is bite different I know). EU is not a country but a group of countries, so how one man (woman?) represent several countries which are differents and have not the same interrest, politic, economy ?

  4. #4
    AO Antique pwaring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,409
    Well, I'm pretty anti-EU so I don't believe in us having a president at all - what's wrong with each member state having its own president/prime minister and running their own affairs? Europe should be about free trade, not politics and legislation (or only the bare minimum required to keep free trade going).

    Besides, whoever was voted president would act in their country's interests, regardless of whether they were supposed to or not. Their country would probably suddenly start getting the lion's share of EU development grants etc.
    Paul Waring - Web site design and development.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,193
    yes darkes, that is what I meant to say. You're quite correct, there is a president. I was referring to the longer term, higher level office being currently discussed by some.

    It is said in certain corridors that the EU should have a prez with similar weight (political) to the US president.
    Trappedagainbyperfectlogic.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    485
    Originally posted here by gold eagle
    yes darkes, that is what I meant to say. You're quite correct, there is a president. I was referring to the longer term, higher level office being currently discussed by some.

    It is said in certain corridors that the EU should have a prez with similar weight (political) to the US president.
    This is all tied in with the new EU constitution that is being negotiated at the moment.

    With the enlargement of the EU, the existing structures won't work, so some of 'old Europe' i.e. France, Germany, and surprisingly the UK are trying to push through changes so that their influence is maintained. The Eastern European countries that are about to join are pissed off with this, and would prefer Ghostdog's suggestion that everything is decided by a majority vote.

    All comes to down to whether you want:
    (a) A federal Europe with a powerful president (same sort of structure as the US, so that National governments end up with similar powers that each state in the US has), or
    (b) A collection of countries with common interests, where each National goverment has power to set their own laws/economic policy etc. and EU policies are decided by a majority vote.

    The EU is somewhere in the middle at the moment and deciding which way to jump.

    What is surprising about the UK position is that opinion poles show that the UK is strongly opposed to a federal Europe, and therefore also against the proposed EU constitution, and as a consequence is not in favour of joining the Euro either.

    Mind you, since when have political leaders (Blair in this case) reflected the view of the people who elected them?

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,193
    It certainly is an interesting debate. With so many members it is going to make voting on issues a real circus.
    Trappedagainbyperfectlogic.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    485
    Originally posted here by gold eagle
    It certainly is an interesting debate. With so many members it is going to make voting on issues a real circus.
    Speaking from this side of the pond, it doesn't have to become a circus.

    It depends on which way the EU goes. I think they are utterly wrong to press ahead with a federal Europe at this time, as that will only increase the influence of France & Germany to the detriment of every other country in the EU.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    321
    A president is needed if the eu wants to become a strong economical and political pole ....
    except that europe are light years aways from it since few politicians would support the idea of giving up power over foreign policy ....
    assembly.... digital dna ?

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,193
    darkes, that is an excellent point. If France and Germany were to increase in clout it would certainly not be in the best interests of the rest of the family.

    Word to France and Germany, At least give the new guys a chance to find their seats begore starting the musical chairs.
    Trappedagainbyperfectlogic.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •