Do you think that politicians who brutally critique the EU are over the top? If you do you are about to change your mind.
First of all 5/6th of all laws in member countries such as England are directives from the EU. EU courts can overrule member nation courts.
When member states had referendums on the EU there were commercials lying to the people saying that the vote was just about a trade agreement creating a European Common Market. This was a lie as it was so much more as you are about to see. Ever since that time the governments of those who voted no (France etc) went ahead with it anyway. In Ireland where the referendum lost the EU said that Ireland will vote over and over again until it passes and that after it does pass there will be no more referendums. So Ireland did just that. The EU outspent the UKIP and the EU Democracy Group 10 to 1 and yet the state sponsored media accused UKIP of nosing into the votes of other countries and of trying to buy the vote. Ireland even broke its own laws when it comes to equal time when it came to the vote. Now the EU takes very careful steps to see to it that it does nothing that could trigger a referendum in other member states.
The problem is that in many EU member states such as England, until recently they did not have political parties that were interested in limiting the power of the state. The conservative party in England moved far to the left after Margaret Thatcher retired. We often here how the Democrats here in the United States are a socialist/corporatist leviathan state party and how the Republicans are socialist/corporatist light party and while these claims are slightly exaggerated for political effect, in Europe these claims are a genuine understatement.
The EU is in essence rule by bureaucracy and like government bureaucrats seeks to rule in secret to avoid public accountability or scrutiny.
So how does it work.
27 unelected commissars are appointed and each member state gets a member to represent them. They are not elected and most people have no idea who they are. When they decide that they want to pass a law they meet in secret and make a rough outline for what they want the law (called a directive) to be.
The rough outline for the directive is sent to the Committee of Permanent Representatives which meets in secret (less chance of people rising up against it you see). They are not elected and no one outside of the bureaucratic elite knows who all of them are. Until recently they were not even mentioned on the EU web site. The only reason the group even gets a slight mention is because UKIP and the EU Democracy Group in the EU Parliament had a fit about it.
The Committee of Permanent Representatives does the markup session on the bill (directive) and makes it sound legally neat and tidy, but they hold no hearings, after all what is the point of hearings when you meet in secret? If this committee decided the proposed directive is dumb they can just ignore it and stop it right there.
The marked up and formatted bill is send to the Conference of Ministers, who is also not elected, and who also meets in secret, decides if they will accept the it or not (sensing a pattern yet)? With all of this secrecy and all of this bureaucracy how can anyone be held accountable? If something goes bad who is a finger pointed at? Finger pointing is next to impossible which is by design. By the way some of the known members of these various super committees are former Soviet era apparatchiks.
The directive is sent to the EU Parliament to a vote. The EU is elected and has meetings out in the open. They can vote yes or no, but if they vote no it becomes a law anyways. The EU Parliament is powerless to stop these directives nor can it amend or change them in anyway. This is like a school board when it wants to adopt “Outcome Based Education” to get the federal grant even though it has proven to lower test scored and be a failure in general; it has parental input meetings which mean nothing and will not change anything, but are made to provide the illusion of public input.
The directive (law) is sent to the member nations to have the local parliaments rubber stamp them which the larger parties in England usually do as there has been very little difference between them since Lady Thatcher retired. If the member nation’s parliament votes no, too bad, they enforce it anyways. If the member nation moves to actively resist such enforcement they are fined. The member nation can refuse to pay them, for now, but they have regulatory ways to suck money out of a member state anyways.
All is not lost. The Freedom & Democracy Caucus in the EU Parliament has been steadily growing and according to pills the UK Independence Party (UKIP) according to polls will leap to the second most powerful party in England in the upcoming elections. The best way to describe UKIP is the Tea Party of England accept their leadership is a bit more centralized and incredibly brilliant (I am not saying the Tea Party people are dumb, but rather that the UKIP leadership is a group of people who have incredible political savvy and candle power. UKIP Ideologically would closest resemble economic freedom wing of the Republican Party, but with more tolerance for collective action than many Republicans, the Tea Party’s zeal for popular sovereignty and process, and a Chris Christie like attitude. UKIP is devoutly anti-communist.
UKIP started out as a one man protest. That man is Nigel Farage a small businessman from London. When he realized what was going on he stood up and started giving speeches. He got in the reporters faces. he challenged his opponents to debates, and quite foolishly those opponents accepted that challenge and in debate after debate were rhetorically dismantled by Farage. His movement has grown and is now the UKIP which will be taking the UK Parliament by storm in the upcoming elections. Nigel Farage is Europe’s Sam Adams.
Would YOU buy a used car from this European Commission? -