Wapo throws down the gauntlet

[Paul Rigby]

Love the way they make out the EU is a democracy - which is a load of balls to start with.

How EU Law is made. Why you will never have a say.

by Charles Cawley May 19, 2016 - 5:13am

http://www.writerbeat.com/articles/9910-...have-a-say

In a brief explanation from the EU about the Commission and its appointees, it neatly avoids the reality that the European Commission holds the cards of power. http://ec.europa.eu/about/index_en.htm#president The EU considers Democracy an evil and its greatest enemy; it has structured itself accordingly.

The Commission is partly made up of 28 appointees from each member state with a virtually bulletproof tenure of 5 years. These people are unelected and cannot be removed by voters. The only time removal happened was when the Santer Commission was so obvious and shockingly corrupt that a motion of censure from the EU Parliament (the 'nuclear option') led to its removal. Even then, many of members of that discredited and appalling Commission remained in tenure afterwards.

The President of the Commission, (Juncker), is taken from a short list proposed by the European (EU) Council rubber stamped by a vote of the EU Parliament. In the case of Juncker, it was from a short list of one. The President then selects 27 other Commissioners 'on the basis of suggestions' from member states. The President selects and has the power to turn down any 'suggestion'. The UK opposed the appointment of Juncker.

In addition, the Oath taken by EU Commissioners includes these words: 'neither to seek nor to take instructions from any Government or from any other institution.' Source. It makes things very clear that a commissioner must not back or represent the government or nation that appointed or suggested them.

So far, we have 28 appointees from member states and 27 other appointees dependent on the sole approval of, in this case, the President of The EU Commission (that the UK did not want) rubber stamped from a short list of one by the EU Parliament. The latter also need approval, as a group, and another rubber stamp from the EU Parliament.

The EU Council President, (Donald Tusk) is selected by the heads of state or Prime Minister, its members. The Council, ostensibly sets EU policy by 'conclusions' and identifies 'concerns'. These are, then, considered by the Commission. Neatly, the President of the Commission also sits on the EU Council. This is highly relevant.

Now comes the Law bit.

The EU Commission has the absolute right to 'initiate proposals' for all EU Law, Repeals and amendments. There are no exceptions. If a suggestion for a law is made by the EU Parliament, the EU Council or from anybody, and the Commission decides not to initiate a proposal, nothing happens. This is an absolute veto.

What really happens: The Council will discuss 'issues', policies etc: and will, like children asking for money from their dad for a project, ask the EU Commission, should they make a suggestion, if Commission would carry it forward and 'initiate a proposal'. The metaphor of the EU as a family is often used by MEPs. Heated fears of qualified majority voting on the EU Council were a smokescreen; the EU Commission has the whip-hand in all matters of law. If you want a law or want to change any law, the EU Commission must approve, otherwise it will not happen.

What of the EU Parliament? It cannot repeal legislation without the Commission agreeing. It cannot amend laws without the Commission agreeing. It cannot even initiate legislation without, first, getting the agreement of the Commission. '

The European Commission is the only institution empowered to initiate legislation' http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparli...ive-powers There are no exceptions.

The EU Parliament cannot suggest members of the Commission, the President of the Commission, the President of the Council. No elected MEP can sit on the EU Council or the Commission. Its only part in this is to rubber stamp lists of proposed appointees put forward to them. The only substantive power the Parliament has, other than the negative ability to veto, is to dismiss the entire Commission as a group and to reject EU budgets as a whole. It is the most impotent, biased, and one of the most expensive talking-shop assemblies in the World.

This is the picture of EU fig-leaf democracy. It is made worse by the massive salaries paid to Commissioners buying loyalty to a corrupt and primitive political system. This corrupt approach continues into retirement with massive pensions subject to withdrawal if ex-employees dare speak against the EU. This strips the veil from supposed EU respect for rights and free speech. It considers Democracy and such rights as its greatest enemy.

Commissioners are, of course, beneficiaries of a reduced tax regime and legal immunities. They are called 'functionaries' by the EU which does not quite have the connotation of the French: 'fonctionnaire'. Here are civil servants, protected by immunity, virtually unremovable, paid massive sums, with an effective veto on all EU policy and law. Bureaucratic interference and obduracy has long been a complaint of British democratic leaders but the EU is the ultimate triumph of rule by civil servants.

The EU Commission is also responsible for enforcing laws it has, effectively, either made or permitted. If it has a bright idea it can 'initiate a proposal' all of its own, if need be, by doing a contra-deal with a group on the EU Council. If it wants to start a dispute with Russia, it can do so and we can do nothing about it. If it ignores EU law, it can do so, without any let. The Commission answers only to itself. Whilst pretending it is a servant, it is the master.

This is not 'Yes Minister' it is: 'We are your rulers and expect your obedience because superior wiser people know what is good for you'. The EU is a move from comedy towards tyranny- a ghastly metamorphosis.

Meanwhile, the impotent EU Parliament is dominated by highly paid MEPs from net taking countries. Countries make a net contribution are vastly out voted. In addition, as the Parliament approves budgets, it is a simple deal to use EU funds and the net contributions to permit 'business as usual' by the EU Commission in exchange for large salaries and poor accounting of funds distributed by the EU to member countries. Corruption is twofold. The EU knowingly distributes vast sums to member states who syphon a proportion into private pockets in return for buying its political security. EU accounts have not been signed off for decades for this simple, nasty reason.

All EU Law must be agreed by the corrupt all powerful veto of the EU Commission. The Parliament is an assembly of, largely bought MEPs which is, at best, fig-leaf democracy and, at worst, peopled by those with a vested interest in the corrupt dissemination of EU funds to member states.

This is a very dangerous and deeply nasty scene. Vast sums of the tax money of EU nation states are being used to buy and corrupt large swathes of political establishments to sell out their own people. They do not realize that once the EU gains domination, the next people to be stripped of political power and wealth, after the voters, will be those who betrayed them.

That is how the anti-democratic politics of wealth extraction work. The EU is a growing disaster in the making. Remain are backing an immoral and utterly disgraceful plan and should be treated accordingly, with due disgust and anger.