In what way is the EU undemocratic?

The European Commission is not accountable to the European electorate, it is made up of 28 commissioners who have been appointed by heads of state but has the authority to formulate legislation. It is fundamentally undemocratic for any political body to excersise even a degree of law making power if it can't be directly elected or removed in an election by the public.

The European Court of Justice holds presedence over national courts.

The ECJ can bypass and dissapply sovereign legislative decisions that have been formulated in national parliaments. (See the factortame case as a good example)

This one doesn't apply to Britain specifically, but the European Central Bank excerises a significant amount of monetary policy.

In what way is the UK Civil Service accountable to the British public? In what way are those parts of the UK Civil Service which support the Scottish Welsh and NI governments accountable to the public or even the governments of those places?

If you suggest the Civil Service doesn't exercise law making power, tell me what is the Conservatives' position on the Air Navigation (Restriction of Flying) (Bath) (Emergency) Regulations 2016.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/580/pdfs/uksi_20160580_en.pdf

To what extent does Labour disagree? Does Nicola Sturgeon have a view?

In reality a minister was told to sign on the dotted line.



But national Parliaments have agreed to give it that power and in depriving it of that power, you are trying to frustrate the will of national politicians.



But most national Constitutional Courts also have that power, although ours doesn't.



But our Central Bank is set up to take decisions independent of Parliament or government.

People keep saying this, but I really don't understand why. Nobody seems to know how the EU is undemocratic, they just know that it is. They don't even seem to have any idea how the EU works.

Could someone please explain?

You know that it is disingenuous to say that the Commission is the equivalent of the Civil Service and know that it is the equivalent of the government.

It is fundamentally undemocratic for any political body to excersise even a degree of law making power if it can't be directly elected or removed in an election by the public.

I never had an option to vote for Juncker as the president the European Parliament. That decision was taken out of my hands and made for me by a self-serving group of elite few.

I didn't vote for Cameron either, but at least I had the option to vote for who was in charge. Yeah, the vote didn't go my way. But at least I was offered an opinion.

We don't get that option in the EU. All our decisions on leadership are taken out of the regular person's hands and left in the hands of the elite which isn't a fair or democractic system.

Do you live in Witney, because if you don't you had no more opportunity to choose Cameron than to choose Juncker. Juncker is President of the Commission (Schulz is President of the European Parliament) because he commanded the support of a qualified majority of 28 Prime Ministers and a majority of the European Parliament. Cameron is Prime Minister because he commands the support of a majority of Conservative MPs and Conservative MPs comprise a majority of all MPs.

How do you justify the representation deficit I mentioned on post #5?

In what way is the UK Civil Service accountable to the British public? In what way are those parts of the UK Civil Service which support the Scottish Welsh and NI governments accountable to the public or even the governments of those places?

If you suggest the Civil Service doesn't exercise law making power, tell me what is the Conservatives' position on the Air Navigation (Restriction of Flying) (Bath) (Emergency) Regulations 2016.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/580/pdfs/uksi_20160580_en.pdf

To what extent does Labour disagree? Does Nicola Sturgeon have a view?

In reality a minister was told to sign on the dotted line.



But national Parliaments have agreed to give it that power and in depriving it of that power, you are trying to frustrate the will of national politicians.



But most national Constitutional Courts also have that power, although ours doesn't.



But our Central Bank is set up to take decisions independent of Parliament or government.

The variation in the size of constituency at Westminster by electorate is far greater from 21,769 in the Western Isles to 108,804 in the Isle of Wight, Excluding islands, it still ranges from 40,492 in Arfon to 91,987 in Ilford south. The reason is that democracy represents communities as well as headcount Likewise each state in the USA regardless of size elects 2 senators.

I have never been fully convinced by direct election to the European Parliament. Neither the Parliamentary bodies of NATO nor the Council of Europe have direct election. MPs of the members states are seconded, which used to happen with the EU.

An EU Parliament of some kind is necessary as a forum for petitioning. The EU Commission only listens to Pan-European representational groups which means that without the Parliament, the views of anyone who cannot command a majority of their EU representational group would not be heard e.g. Swedish whisky makers or English wine makers

But if you look at the variance in the statistic, you will see that the population variance in UK constituencies are much lower than the variance in EU states.

That is a complaint about a relatively meaningless statistic. No-one lives in a town called Average.

The European Commission is not accountable to the European electorate, it is made up of 28 commissioners who have been appointed by heads of state but has the authority to formulate legislation. It is fundamentally undemocratic for any political body to excersise even a degree of law making power if it can't be directly elected or removed in an election by the public.

The European parliament is the only directly elected body in the EU, yet the only one that can't actually formulate policy. It is a purely legislative, scrutiny chamber.

The European Court of Justice holds presedence over national courts. The ECJ can bypass and dissapply sovereign legislative decisions that have been formulated in national parliaments. (See the factortame case as a good example)

This one doesn't apply to Britain specifically, but the European Central Bank excerises a significant amount of monetary policy. It held Greece hostage with the IMF and effectively forced an elected government (Syriza) to back down on its mandate and manifesto.

The UK has the 2nd highest population per MEP figure in the European Parliament of 875,289, whereas the average figure member state is 673,370 (source). Our voting power calculates to just under 10%. It will depend on your definition of 'democracy' to judge if this qualifies as democratic. To many people it is not.

Coming from a first past the post system, where many people's votes are essentially completely ignored, a slightly different per capita voting power between countries is undemocratic?

The irony is killing me.

Or are you trying to say that the EU is undemocratic because Britain only get's a 10% vote and if they had a >50% vote people would be happy?

I don't think you, or most people with your viewpoint, even know what "democratic" means.

'Given the wide policy areas the EU governs over us, I would expect a fairer representation in deciding those policies nor do I see them as irreplaceable should we decide to leave the EU and have our own legislations.

The fundamental principle of Democracy is that every person's vote should be the same and wield the same amount of power.

One could say that the UK's first-pass-the-post system also fails to bring the same voting power to each citizen, but one key point to consider is that the the variation in constituency population size is on a much smaller scale, and the election is 100% influenced by the needs and interests of British people. We have no reason to magnify our representation deficit by a factor of hundreds by exposing ourself to a flawed external system, of which we have only 10% power to reform.

We do not need a multi-state parliament when there is no need for it, and exists merely for ideological reason.'

The complaint, as I stated is the representation deficit, I am not asking for an over-representation but just a fair one.

The correct mentality is not 'our system isn't perfect, so let's include ourselves into an even more flawed system'. The correct logic is to exit ourselves from the external system and then improve our local system.

Comparing for argument's sake does not solve the problem, nor does it justify or fix the unfair structure of the EU parliamentary system.

Also as I stated, if you look at the variance in the statistic, you will see that the population variance of voting power in UK constituencies is much lower than the variance in EU states. So the comparison does not swing towards your argument too.

Don't you think the European Parliament needs reform to make the spread closer towards the average point?