6 ms·

Your comment re Merkel, Cameron et al is a strawman: just because the existing system of parliamentary democracy is deeply flawed, it does not follow that anoth

Your comment re Merkel, Cameron et al is a strawman: just because the existing system of parliamentary democracy is deeply flawed, it does not follow that another even less democratic system is acceptable. You point out that Cameron (for example) is not directly elected as PM. He does however have to be elected to parliament via a democratic vote. Unlike the European Commission, where commissioners have no democratic mandate to speak of and yet they hold immense power. 34% of those eligible voted in the UK European elections (i.e. for the European Parliament). Your comment re people not caring is overly simplistic. People will not vote for a wide variety of reasons. Only one of which is that they "don't care". Edit: please explain your downvote, so that I may improve my comment or respond.

germanier 11y ago
The European Commission is proposed by the (elected) heads of governments and then approved via a democratic vote by the (directly elected) members of the European Parliament. I'd call that a strong democratic mandate. The European Parliament has the power to reject Commissions they don't see fit and did so in the past. That's even more power to the members of parliament than in most member states where the head of government can freely appoint ministers without approval of the parliament.
babatong 11y ago
>He does however have to be elected to parliament via a democratic vote. Unlike the European Commission, where commissioners have no democratic mandate to speak of and yet they hold immense power. You are incorrect. Since the Lisbon treaty at least, the commission is proposed by the council and then has to be voted on by the parliament. If anything that gives it even more democratic legitimacy than Cameron, as in his case only he himself, not his cabinet is voted on by parliament. You are of course within your right to criticize the parliamentary democratic system within it self. However a claim that the processes by which the commission is put in place are less democratic than the processes by which Cameron or Merkel came to power are just outright false.
- benaston 11y ago
  @germanier and @babatong No, you are both wrong. The democratic mandate for EU commissioners is less strong than for directly elected officials. @matt4077 called out that even Cameron is not elected directly as PM, and that is correct. The problems with the existing parliamentary democracy in the UK are well understood. So having a "somewhat undemocratically elected official" Cameron, nominate a person for the commission who has not been directly elected at all by the populous, is less democratic because it is one step further removed from direct election. This is how we have all these "unknown faces" wielding immense power in Brussels - like Herman Van Rompuy, President of the European Council. The democratically elected European Parliament then vote for the nominees, but at this point the nominees already have less mandate (for reasons given above) than the members of national parliaments (and the EU parliament). And, I might add, more power. This is one of the main problems with the EU as a political union. It is a move away from grass-roots democracy towards a centralized monolith that disenfranchises millions and millions of people.
  - germanier 11y ago
    You seem to miss that the vote in parliament adds and doesn't remove mandate from the candidates. The MEPs have a very strong opinion on who is a suitable candidate and who isn't. They used their power to refuse candidates and demand others in the past and will do so in the future. By your standards the European Commission has a mandate that is at least as strong as the one of any European country's government.
    - benaston 11y ago
      Not at all. The question at hand is: do the EU commissioners have a stronger or weaker democratic mandate than national MPs? When considering this question, the vote in the EU parliament is neither here nor there, because the person being voted for by them has not been directly elected by a single member of the public, possibly ever. If a person is directly elected by the people he represents, then he has a stronger mandate than another who has not been directly elected. Mandate gets weaker the farther you are from direct election by the people.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

germanier 11y ago

The European Commission is proposed by the (elected) heads of governments and then approved via a democratic vote by the (directly elected) members of the European Parliament. I'd call that a strong democratic mandate. The European Parliament has the power to reject Commissions they don't see fit and did so in the past. That's even more power to the members of parliament than in most member states where the head of government can freely appoint ministers without approval of the parliament.

babatong 11y ago

>He does however have to be elected to parliament via a democratic vote. Unlike the European Commission, where commissioners have no democratic mandate to speak of and yet they hold immense power. You are incorrect. Since the Lisbon treaty at least, the commission is proposed by the council and then has to be voted on by the parliament. If anything that gives it even more democratic legitimacy than Cameron, as in his case only he himself, not his cabinet is voted on by parliament. You are of course within your right to criticize the parliamentary democratic system within it self. However a claim that the processes by which the commission is put in place are less democratic than the processes by which Cameron or Merkel came to power are just outright false.

benaston 11y ago
@germanier and @babatong No, you are both wrong. The democratic mandate for EU commissioners is less strong than for directly elected officials. @matt4077 called out that even Cameron is not elected directly as PM, and that is correct. The problems with the existing parliamentary democracy in the UK are well understood. So having a "somewhat undemocratically elected official" Cameron, nominate a person for the commission who has not been directly elected at all by the populous, is less democratic because it is one step further removed from direct election. This is how we have all these "unknown faces" wielding immense power in Brussels - like Herman Van Rompuy, President of the European Council. The democratically elected European Parliament then vote for the nominees, but at this point the nominees already have less mandate (for reasons given above) than the members of national parliaments (and the EU parliament). And, I might add, more power. This is one of the main problems with the EU as a political union. It is a move away from grass-roots democracy towards a centralized monolith that disenfranchises millions and millions of people.
- germanier 11y ago
  You seem to miss that the vote in parliament adds and doesn't remove mandate from the candidates. The MEPs have a very strong opinion on who is a suitable candidate and who isn't. They used their power to refuse candidates and demand others in the past and will do so in the future. By your standards the European Commission has a mandate that is at least as strong as the one of any European country's government.
  - benaston 11y ago
    Not at all. The question at hand is: do the EU commissioners have a stronger or weaker democratic mandate than national MPs? When considering this question, the vote in the EU parliament is neither here nor there, because the person being voted for by them has not been directly elected by a single member of the public, possibly ever. If a person is directly elected by the people he represents, then he has a stronger mandate than another who has not been directly elected. Mandate gets weaker the farther you are from direct election by the people.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]