Languish.org

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/gavinhewitt/

Quote
The fight over a Blair presidency

Gavin Hewitt | 11:04 UK time, Sunday, 25 October 2009

In the days and weeks ahead the arguments over whether Tony Blair should be the first President of the European Council are likely to intensify. The British Foreign Secretary David Miliband, gave strong backing today to Tony Blair getting the top job. European leaders are dividing between those who want a charismatic figure to be the face of Europe on the international stage and those who want a more modest "business manager".

David Miliband said today it was very important for Europe to have a strong figure, who when they land in Beijing and Moscow the "traffic stops" for the motorcade. "It would be good for Britain and for Europe if Tony Blair became that candidate." However it is not clear whether Tony Blair would put himself forward until the job is more closely defined.

My understanding is that the former prime minister would not be interested in just chairing summits and seeking out consensus. Increasingly the presidency is developing into a split between the big countries and the smaller states. Britain wants a powerful big hitter as president, so does France, Italy and probably Spain.

Angela Merkel's position is not yet clear and much will rest on what she decides. But the smaller players like Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg are set against a strong presidency. Other countries like Poland do not want to see their position weakened when it comes to their turn to hold the rotating presidency of the EU.

So the battle will sharpen. The main arguments against Tony Blair so far have been that Britain is not part of the Euro but expect more attention to move to the fact that he will be the main witness at the forthcoming Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war. One of the key questions to be decided is whether the former prime minister abused power.

The Conservatives have been actively telling EU ambassadors that they object strongly to a Blair presidency. That may have the opposite effect to what they desire. Some EU countries see a Blair presidency as providing a counterpoint to a eurosceptic David Cameron government.

Now if Tony Blair stumbles then Britain will turn its eye to the job of High Representative for Foreign Affairs. The person will be vice president of the European Commission and will have a diplomatic service at their disposal. It is potentially a very powerful job. David Miliband will again speak about this role on Monday. It has led to speculation in Europe that he is interested in the role.

He said today that "No, I am not a candidate. I'm not available." That may not stem the growing interest in the British foreign secretary in European capitals.

I hereby announce that should Tony Blair become the first "president of Europe" I will stomach a whole dish of broccoli and cauliflower. And the only things I hate more than broccoli are cauliflowers and nazis. I don't know what weed some persons are smoking, but it must be strong indeed to make them think Blair can become president!

1. Because of the things he did. For many Europeans (and British) he will always be Tony BLIAR.

2. Because of the things he did not. He is supposed to be working as "official Envoy of the Quartet on the Middle East on behalf of the United Nations, the European Union, the United States, and Russia". And he has done exactly nothing... In fact, one has to wonder why did he accept the position if he wasn't interested at all.

3. Because he's from one of the big countries. The other 'bigs' won't support a British candidate, smaller countries will want the first president to be from one of the medium powers. Someone like Vaclav Havel, for example...

4. Because he's British, nuff said. Seriously, how can one imagine the other countries will support a British president when Great Britain in the near future can be having a referendum on the Treaty that made him president, if not on leaving the Union?   

And on top of that Gordon Brown will surely "love" the idea and the Tories, which everyone expect to win the next election, are dead set against him... No, I will be mildly surprised if Milliband gets the "European Foreign Office", but... Tony Blair, president? That wouldn't be a surprise but a miracle! If anyone thinks he has any realistic possibility I would like to hear why...

Yeah, weird isn't it?

I can't see him getting the job, which is a great relief as several more years of Blair's lower lip-trembling "sincerity" would be most disagreeable.

One assumes they will dig up an extremely boring Belgian for this role, or maybe a Eastern European with more personal clout but from an inconsiderable country.

I don't see the problems. I'm totally in favor of a Linda Blair presidency.

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 26, 2009, 07:17:08 AM
One assumes they will dig up an extremely boring Belgian for this role, or maybe a Eastern European with more personal clout but from an inconsiderable country.

I forgot to comment some have said Felipe González is another possible president, but in my opinion with Barroso and Solana the Iberian peninsula is already heavily overrepresented. Suggesting another Iberian for a top position would probably cause as many laughs as Blair's candidacy (and besides González speaks very good French, but his English isn't good enough unless he has worked on it, and that's an essential skill for the position)

This page seems a really good resume of the possible candidates

http://www.euractiv.com/en/future-eu/choosing-europe/article-185666?_print

So this isn't really an elected position is it?

Quote from: Alatriste on October 26, 2009, 07:39:00 AM

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 26, 2009, 07:17:08 AM
One assumes they will dig up an extremely boring Belgian for this role, or maybe a Eastern European with more personal clout but from an inconsiderable country.

I forgot to comment some have said Felipe González is another possible president, but in my opinion with Barroso and Solana the Iberian peninsula is already heavily overrepresented. Suggesting another Iberian for a top position would probably cause as many laughs as Blair's candidacy (and besides González speaks very good French, but his English isn't good enough unless he has worked on it, and that's an essential skill for the position)

This page seems a really good resume of the possible candidates

http://www.euractiv.com/en/future-eu/choosing-europe/article-185666?_print

I really hope that corrupt shit Bertie Ahern doesn't get it. At the moment he's flogging his autobiography, in interviews he takes absolutely no responsibility for the economic mess he left the country in.

Also I certainly wouldn't classify him as a centrist. He has done his best to help his wealthy builder friends and the Catholic church.

If he doesn't get the job of President of Europe, there's still a risk he might get elected President of Ireland, which would also be awful.

Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2009, 08:21:33 AM
So this isn't really an elected position is it?

Treaty of Lisbon, article 9B

5. The European Council shall elect its President, by a qualified majority, for a term of two and a half years, renewable once. In the event of an impediment or serious misconduct, the European Council can end the President's term of office in accordance with the same procedure.

The Council is composed by the primer ministers or presidents of each country and the president of the Commission, José Manuel Durão Barroso, 28 members in total. "Qualified majority" means  55% of member states and 65% of the Union population... in other words, to reach it you need the majority of the big countries to reach that 65% of the population, but also the support of a fair number of small countries (55% means 15 countries from 27 if I'm not wrong)

IMHO it's a bit complex but more democratic than US Senate, for example.

I don't see how that's more democratic then electing a senator.

Quote from: Alatriste on October 26, 2009, 08:56:55 AM
IMHO it's a bit complex but more democratic than US Senate, for example.

It is about as democratic as Republican Rome.  Not sure how weighted voting based on money or whatever qualifies as "more democratic" than one man, one vote.

Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2009, 10:07:59 AM
I don't see how that's more democratic then electing a senator.

I think he is talking about the President Pro Tem of the Senate.  It would be silly to compare an organizational vote to a popular one, rather than another organizational vote.

We are talking about the President of the European Council, not an actual "President of Europe."  The equivelent would be the old "President of the Continental Congress" under the US Articles of Confederation.

Europe will get the president it deserves, which to say an uninspired one.

Quote from: Warspite on October 26, 2009, 01:30:03 PM
Europe will get the president it deserves, which to say an uninspired one.

Say what you will about Blair, but I'm sure he'd be a much more compelling President than some unknown Eurocrat.

No, we want a Belgian non-entity and we want him now  :P

Looking at the list Alatriste posted my vote is for Herman van Rompuy. Just imagine the Sun headline if he got involved in a sex scandal :

EU President in 3-in-a-bed Rompuy-Pumpuy!!

Quote from: Barrister on October 26, 2009, 01:31:34 PM

Quote from: Warspite on October 26, 2009, 01:30:03 PM
Europe will get the president it deserves, which to say an uninspired one.

Say what you will about Blair, but I'm sure he'd be a much more compelling President than some unknown Eurocrat.

I agree.

Quote from: Razgovory on October 26, 2009, 10:07:59 AM
I don't see how that's more democratic then electing a senator.

I think it is somewhat similar in procedure of electing the US president. Each member state elects its own representatives for the "electoral college" aka EU council, with a first-past-the-post system. These representatives (who also happen to be the national government ;)) then vote in one bloc per country and the bigger countries have more votes than the smaller ones. A difference is that the voting weight is not strictly according to population but rather favors the small countries and disfavors the big countries.

I hope they can't agree on anybody and then Angie steps up and takes the post. That way we would get rid of her in Germany. :)

EDIT: Of course that will never happen. Merkel has shown that she doesn't think of Brussels highly. She recently appointed a failed regional politician as the next German EU commissioner.

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 26, 2009, 07:17:08 AM
One assumes they will dig up an extremely boring Belgian for this role,

unlikely as our country is about to go into constitutional crisis... probably in about 120 days if all goes well

Actually, it appears to be most similar to the election of the PRC President: the President is elected by a vote of politicians in a legislative body, without a popular vote.

It has very little in common with the electoral college.

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on October 26, 2009, 02:37:53 PM

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 26, 2009, 07:17:08 AM
One assumes they will dig up an extremely boring Belgian for this role,

unlikely as our country is about to go into constitutional crisis... probably in about 120 days if all goes well

Again??
You're as bad as Italy.

Quote from: grumbler on October 26, 2009, 10:12:55 AM

Quote from: Alatriste on October 26, 2009, 08:56:55 AM
IMHO it's a bit complex but more democratic than US Senate, for example.

It is about as democratic as Republican Rome.  Not sure how weighted voting based on money or whatever qualifies as "more democratic" than one man, one vote.

Those votes are weighted based on population, not money or "whatever" and that's quite another thing. Where did you (and others, this answer is valid for HMBoB also) get such an idea, I can't understand.

We send our premiers and presidents, democratically elected, to the Council, and they vote according to population, but with a correction so that tiny little countries like Malta (extreme case, of curse) have at least some weight. 

In contrast, US states send each two senators to Washington. One can represent 20,000,000 citizens, other 200,000. That's not "one man, one vote", it's 20 millions one vote, 200,000 one vote, if you get what I mean...

Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 26, 2009, 07:03:32 PM

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on October 26, 2009, 02:37:53 PM

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 26, 2009, 07:17:08 AM
One assumes they will dig up an extremely boring Belgian for this role,

unlikely as our country is about to go into constitutional crisis... probably in about 120 days if all goes well

Again??
You're as bad as Italy.

Indeed it seems like the eighties are back over here. That period is now known as the 'Malgoverno'
Francophone-Flemish tensions Check
Economical woes Check
An evergrowing of our National Debt and politicians to afraid to do something check.
Belgium came from a debt in that period of 125% of the GNP which was lowered to 90% in the 90s and is now up again.

I've got the feeling I'll be working till '70 for my pension if Belgium isn't broke by than.

Quote from: Alatriste on October 27, 2009, 09:07:43 AM
Those votes are weighted based on population, not money or "whatever" and that's quite another thing. Where did you (and others, this answer is valid for HMBoB also) get such an idea, I can't understand.

How did I get the idea that the votes were weighted by "whatever?"  The same place you got it!

QuoteWe send our premiers and presidents, democratically elected, to the Council, and they vote according to population, but with a correction so that tiny little countries like Malta (extreme case, of curse) have at least some weight. 

So it isn't weighted by population, but rather by "population modified by whatever."

QuoteIn contrast, US states send each two senators to Washington. One can represent 20,000,000 citizens, other 200,000. That's not "one man, one vote", it's 20 millions one vote, 200,000 one vote, if you get what I mean...

Each state gets two votes in the Senate.  Each vote counts exactly the same.  That's how democracy works.

Now, if you had the European Council members voting "proxies" so that each had the combined voting power of all the voters in the last election (or all the citizens of the country, or whatever), then this would be democratic.  A system where the votes of certain privileged persons counts for more than the vote of another person, in a system where the representation is supposed to be by populace, is less democratic.  What you end up with is a system like the US electoral college, which no one claims is actually democratic.

In fact, it is ironic to see so many Euros express so much disdain over the US Electoral College, when Europe does the exact same thing (only less transparently).

Quote from: Alatriste on October 27, 2009, 09:07:43 AM

In contrast, US states send each two senators to Washington. One can represent 20,000,000 citizens, other 200,000. That's not "one man, one vote", it's 20 millions one vote, 200,000 one vote, if you get what I mean...

Senators represent states, not people.

Quote from: grumbler on October 27, 2009, 06:50:52 PM
...a system like the US electoral college, which no one claims is actually democratic.

Source?

Yes, I'm being sarcastic.

Actually the system to choose the new president was designed to avoid precisely the problems posed by an 'electoral college' system. By demanding votes representing 65% of the population and 55% of the states, it guarantees majorities in both territories and citizens.

And honestly, I resent being told in one post that democracy means 'one man, one vote' and the opposite in the next, Grumbler. If every state, regardless of its population, sends two senators, votes are anything but equal in value. "Roman Republic", anyone?

Quote from: Zanza on October 26, 2009, 02:14:22 PM
I hope they can't agree on anybody and then Angie steps up and takes the post. That way we would get rid of her in Germany. :)

EDIT: Of course that will never happen. Merkel has shown that she doesn't think of Brussels highly. She recently appointed a failed regional politician as the next German EU commissioner.

The (in)famous Barrosotrick  :lol: