Thread: The EU Diplomatic Corps

Originally Posted by para_medic

Originally Posted by harareboy99

I believe Chruchill wanted Britian to be outside of the so-called 'United States of Europe'.

I think Sir Humphrey might have explained it best:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIXH3-A8zMI

Very funny, if only it were true

Amazing how the same halfwits trot out their screams of "treason" like Pavlov's Dog. No attempt to work out what it all means, just a reactionary stance of "Reds under the bed".

Originally Posted by PoisonDwarf

Amazing how the same halfwits trot out their screams of "treason" like Pavlov's Dog. No attempt to work out what it all means, just a reactionary stance of "Reds under the bed".

I'm not screaming about reds under the bed (I just checked, got to be certain... )

I'm just unsure how realistic an aim it is given the nature of Europe's different interests.

Originally Posted by blonde_guy

Originally Posted by HectortheInspector

The issue is that at the moment, there is still scope for UK Forces to be used in support of UK Foreign policy, and vice versa. If the full EU Diplomatic structure gets going in support of an EU wide Foreign policy, then that may no longer hold true. If, in the interests of EU Foreign policy,
it is necessary to send an expeditionary force somewhere, who is going to go? France? or us? Who else has the gear and the experience? Are we going to be used as the EU's version of the French Foreign Legion to sort out all their little problems?
And what will we get out of it?
So, we might be used in support of EU policy. What happens if EU policy goes against us? If it is politically necessary for Gibraltar to be handed to Spain, or the Falklands to be ceded to Argentina, what veto do we have?

This is my problem with it. I can never see a time where all 27 nations have no individual foreign policies, or how it would be possible for one broad voice to speak for them on all things foreign. Nations differ in their views, it's what makes them individual!

Also, would this have an adverse affect on our Commonwealth ties? Would we have to give these up to Europe too?

You are quite right. It is like herding cats. A similar row is currently going on over endangered species, as reported today.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/

It all comes down to the voting powers described here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_majority_voting

At present, the Treaty of Nice rules apply, but after 2014 the Lisbon rules come in.At the moment, to pass a vote, you need to have a Majority of countries (50% or 67%) and votes (74%) and population (62%)

After 2014 you need a Majority of countries (55% or 72%) representing 65% of the population or condition
To block a vote: At least 4 countries against the proposal or in cases where, under the Treaties, not all members participate the minimum number of members representing more than 35% of the population of the participating Member States, plus one member are against the proposal.

The system gives the majority of voting to the largest populations, but this means that the postage stamp countries like Malta have disproportionate shares. For instance, the UK has the third largest population (62 million), and is one of the top 4 nations, with 29 votes each. So, on that basis 62/29=1 vote per 2 million people.
Malta has 3 votes. It doesn't have 6 million people. It has 400,000.
What you have is a system where the big boys need to put together coalitions of petty states to get anything done. It is a Europe wide, permanently hung Parliament.

As to the Commonwealth? We screwed them over when we joined the Common Market, and we've left them to go their own way ever since. Apart from the historical freak of language and a shared Monarchy, politically we've been loyal Europeans since the 1970's. Europe doesn't want them, so that's that.

Originally Posted by Bee_Gee.

The EU in charge of UK diplomacy?......Right im off to the colonies.

So this could all be easily solved if we stopped mucking about and ended up with the UK in charge of EU diplomacy instead....

Maybe a new job offer for Cyclops Broone if Labour looses the election. A nice comfortable billet in Bruxxelles as the along with his Marxist friends there, in some form of Diplomatic position..... He and Teflon can swap spit in the Mail Personages Locker Room.... what will be do, now that is the 64K Euro question.... Maybe as 'Assistant High Representative of EUSSR-Land' ... :P

Originally Posted by uncle_vanya

Maybe a new job offer for Cyclops Broone if Labour looses the election. A nice comfortable billet in Bruxxelles as the along with his Marxist friends there, in some form of Diplomatic position..... He and Teflon can swap spit in the Mail Personages Locker Room.... what will be do, now that is the 64K Euro question.... Maybe as 'Assistant High Representative of EUSSR-Land' ... :P

2 problems:

1. Everyone in the EU knows he is a useless, stroppy egotist.
2. The UK government submits appointees to the EU commission for approval - don't think CMD is likely to do that somehow.....

Originally Posted by Alsacien

Originally Posted by uncle_vanya

Maybe a new job offer for Cyclops Broone if Labour looses the election. A nice comfortable billet in Bruxxelles as the along with his Marxist friends there, in some form of Diplomatic position..... He and Teflon can swap spit in the Mail Personages Locker Room.... what will be do, now that is the 64K Euro question.... Maybe as 'Assistant High Representative of EUSSR-Land' ... :P

2 problems:

1. Everyone in the EU knows he is a useless, stroppy egotist.
2. The UK government submits appointees to the EU commission for approval - don't think CMD is likely to do that somehow.....

IF Call-Me-Dave gets elected, does he have any power whatsoever to call Ashton home and replace her?

Originally Posted by blonde_guy

IF Call-Me-Dave gets elected, does he have any power whatsoever to call Ashton home and replace her?

I think Hector explained the voting procedures above. One mustn't forget, the power ultimately remains with the Council ie the member states.

As a general comment, the recent 'Corridors of Power' tv series, highlighted the governments of the period'50's > present time circumventing the FCO as required and with a particular distain it appears.

Eden kept his FCO out of the information loop as he wrestled with Suez. Thatcher had an open dislike for this office, while more recently Blair regarded them a mere paper shufflers to be tolerated and not to be encouraged.

We therefore have a recent history of ignoring 'diplomats'. I'd deduce that they can form any union they wish as it doesn't really appear to matter. So where's the panic?

Blonde Guy - NO. Lady Ashton was appointed by the EU (as was its charismatic President). If she left the post (thoughit is diffcult to see what alternative job could match the goodies atatched to her present one) there is no guarantee, short of practical politics, that the replacement would be a Brit. I think one reason for choosing her was that the Eurocrats saw someone who would be so out of her depth that they could run rings round her and make Sir Humphrey look like an amateur. A bit like George I.

Re the Commonwealth, the Artful Frogs squared this circle by maing various islands and bits of rock Departments of France so that they are technically 100% part of the French State. Most of their other ex-colonies are locked into them because their European language is one nobody else uses. Maybe the reason we didn't do something like that was that what we did for one Dependent Territory we would have to do for all, leaving us open to the total depopluation of St Helena and Tristan da Cunha, and maybe a couple of million HK Chinese comng here.

Originally Posted by seaweed

Blonde Guy - NO. Lady Ashton was appointed by the EU

Or was it the Council? Did the UK have a vote in it?
Stop treating the EU as an amorphous foreign power that the UK has no say in. All of this is largely home-made really.