It is not very often that someone warrants the honour of being the subject of two posts in one day on this blog (other than the chief 'pratmoron' in Number 10, who continually undermines his own authority due to his 'foot 'n mouth' problem), so step forward Andrew Duff, a mere 'pratmoron'.
Following on from my earlier post today on Andrew Duff, it is now confirmed that the Constitutional Affairs Committee (CACEP) of the European Parliament have proposed that an extra 25 MEPs be elected on a pan-European ticket, amongst other proposals. Duff maintains that this will improve the popular legitimacy of their House and has a great chance to establish a coherent modernisation of the electoral procedure. What he does not realise is that if the European Parliament had any real legitimacy it would not then be necessary to improve it, popular or otherwise. Of course, Duff's wish to establish a coherent modernisation of the electoral procedure is code for silencing even more the nationalist voices presently being heard. For readers who wish to delve deeper into this matter, click here and follow the links.
This proposal by the CACEP ties in very neatly with my post of a few days ago, on the subject of pan-European parties. It is not unrealistic to query how long before the number of 25 is increased and the number of national MEPs is decreased. This is what Duff was intending with his original draft report which included a proposed mathematical formula for redistributing the seats in the European Parliament, one that was not adopted - but one without doubt for which Duff will continue to press in the future.
Update: In his own words! "If we really want a successful post-national parliamentary democracy, Europe's political class has to move with the times. So far national politicians have been rather bad at connecting citizens with the EU. It will not be acceptable for those national politicians who are so critical of the European Parliament to refuse to contemplate its reform".
4 comments:
If you Wiki Duff you find he could NOT get elected until the voting system was changed in 2005 to Party List. In essence he failed repeatedly to appeal to voters but was selected by his party.
Failure to appeal to voters but still being selected by a party is pretty common across the political spectrum - no?
"Connect to", yes when can we connect our treacherous politicians to the grid? Anytime soon will do for me!
d.b1: Still prefer the lamp post method as it gives more time to watch their feet dancing!
Post a Comment