XPost: uk.politics.misc
From: spamtrap@váilable.here.com
'DVH' wrote thus:
>"aracari" wrote in message
>news:fb6cc82a07906bf711e9c5ac1a69e425@aracari.127.0.0.1...
>> 'DVH' wrote thus:
>>
>>>"aracari" wrote in message
>>>news:e671520e6777f9ea2e8501f1123e508d@aracari.127.0.0.1...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> That is roughly my view of the Council of Ministers, of which the
>>>> new unelected President will be chairman of.
>>>
>>>Expect howls of protest telling you that it's actually the European
>>>Council
>>>he'll be president of.
>>
>> IIUC the EC = the CoM, just a new name. No?
>Naah. It's one of the stupid things about Europe that it has three
>similarly-named Councils with different functions.
>
>The official name for the Council of Ministers is the Council of the
>European Union. The assembly of heads of state and government are the
>European Council.
Really, there's no difference between them essentially. These
are all politicians. You could see the CoM member as the dept
professional and his Head of State as his Manager. So he goes
to the CoM meetings on behalf of his Head with instructions
about what to do etc.
The CoM meet monthly and decide policy and clear the way/prepare
for the 27 Heads to meet up as the European Council and formally
sign up to the latest idea (which they already know about).
Granted, the new President will be the permanent chairman of the
European Council instead of the 6 month rotation hitherto.
The Commission is where things differ. It is (in commercial terms)
a different Division with its own power structure etc.
>It's absurd that they couldn't make the names more distinctive. But it's
>convenient for technocrats.
>
>>
>>>The issue here is that the EU is structured in such a way that it can't be
>>>understood except by technocrats or those who have a professional interest
>>>in it.
>>
>> ~~~
>>
>>>The same was true of Lisbon - and even honest eurocrats like McCreevy
>>>admitted they hadn't read it.
>>
>> Then of course he wouldn't understand it!
>>
>>>> Clearly the intention
>>>> with Lisbon is to give the CoM a more visibly public role with its
>>>> President being higher up the pecking order than the Commission's
>>>> President. Not yet it seems but in good time.....all part of
>>>> constructing the new United States of Europe but with an unelected
>>>> President as No.2 or No.3 in the world.
>>>>
>>>> ISTM the parallel between the EU and Britain is that the EU
>>>> Commission is equivalent to our Civil Service but has enjoyed far
>>>> more power and autonomy, whereas the CoM is more like our
>>>> Executive/Cabinet which sets the agenda and decides policy, then
>>>> throws it over the wall to the Commission for implementation. The
>>>> Commission has always had a lot of power/freedom as to *how* it
>>>> implements CoM policy which has created examples of stupidity...
>>>> straight bananas etc.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Indeed. And where is the "elected" parliament in all this?
>>
>> Oscillating between Strasbourg and somewhere else, then filling
>> out expense claims to cover their costs? ;-)
>
>Yes, that sums it up. They also make dramatic announcements about democracy
>in Zaire occasionally, and bicker among themselves a lot.
>
>>
>>>Nowhere. It's a talking shop of castrates, the EU's harem servants.
>>>
>>>This week's Economist mentions they didn't even have the expertise to come
>>>up with their own opinion on the proposed fund managers directive - they
>>>had
>>>to commission a report from the private sector before they knew what to
>>>think.
>>
>> Who'd have guessed!
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
