Herman Van Rompuy and his EU band of merry men. What do they actually do?

keep the EU functioning properly?

So you trust the moral rectitude and Protestant work ethic of our good British politicians more?

Your link answers your question? He heads the debates in the European council, and was elected by the council members, who were elected by the European people as they are the heads of state. The president you voted for elected van Rompuy.

1) heads of state? no, the EU is dominated by parliamentary systems so they'll be heads of government, not heads of state. heads of government in parliamentary systems aren't elected by the people like a head of state might be, they're chosen by the people that the people chose. so, really, if herman van rompey was "elected", we have to see that he was chosen by a man who was chosen by the people that people chose - how remote is his democratic authority if he has THAT little connection to our electorate?
2) he wasn't "elected", he was "chosen", by people who had no clear or legitimate authority; the MEPs might be as elected for the EU institution and for such a specific function, but not the heads of government, absolutely not - the heads of government of the EU member states really have no mandate to "elect" anybody in the EU because they don't specify in a manifesto from their electorate who they are going to vote for; hell, they don't even talk about it, it's basically an opeque matter of secrecy. for example, nobody is going to elect a conservative government because of who david cameron is (not) going to bid to reign over the EU

Your link answers your question? He heads the debates in the European council, and was elected by the council members, who were elected by the European people as they are the heads of state. The president you voted for elected van Rompuy.

1) The EU institutions refer to their constituent countries as member states, so their leaders are called heads of state in this context.
2) Fine, make that crucial distinction. He was chosen not to lead the EU, but to chair the discussions in the European Council. He has to be a neutral mediator, he is there to facilitate and kindle debate. He also functions as a spokesperson to the outside world. He is the face of whatever the European Council has decided on. So, although is position is necessary for the correct function of the institution he does not in any way 'reign' over the EU. There is a reason why he is a boring politician from Belgium of all places.

3 points here.

1) you can not "facilitate" free speech.
2) what does "facilitate and kindle" even mean? Does he bring the topics up? Does he tell who should argue what?
3) a "spokesperson" who is also a "president" but this "presidency" does not really have a job discription and is essentially a non job.

Why is he being paid thousands and thousands of pounds of UK/ European taxpayers money for a essentially non job. We should cut him as part of the austerity measures.

Posted from TSR Mobile

You can compare Van Rompuy's job to this guy's: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_House_of_Commons_(United_Kingdom)

Also: the European council isn't about free speech, it is about resolving Eu wide issues and coordinating each country's policies. oo

It just seems to me like you need to actually read up on the European institutions so you can have an informed opinion. Your vitriol would be far more convincing if you had a rational argument.

No the speakers job really is not the job that has any resemblance to the EU President.

So the EU is not democratic? On whose authority and with what experience do they have the right to "resolve the EU wide issues"?

I am well informed myself, I am just asking the pro-Europeans for their version of the answers.

You essentially say that the EU president is an over paid, over bureaucratic type of "judge"? Is that it? And this is this guys full time job? To sit there and make sure everyone gets a say?