Samuel Brittan in the FT today makes a very persuasive argument for a halt to further European integration. What the EU needs, he says, is legitimacy not democracy.
There is much to say for this argument. The most common complaint against the EU is not that it is not that citizens don't have enough opportunities to vote. Last week's European elections, with their 43% turnout and overwhelming focus on national issues proved that. In reality the most common complaint is about the "unelected Eurocrats in Brussels".
The only way that the EU can obtain such legitimacy is to abandon the pledge of "ever closer union" and focus on being a collection of member states, with decisions taken through the Council of Ministers. The European Commission's role in this would be that of a normal civil service.
For me the most striking indication of the Commission's failing is its entry exam, where one of the key tests is candidates' knowledge of the history of the European Union. Does this test initiative, responsiveness, analytical skills, intelligence, adaptability, resourcefulness, competence or anything else relevant to the job of running Europe? No, it just says that you can cram a lot of facts into your head and keep them there for 24 hours.
The system is being overhauled next year in favour of a competence-based exam with less facts and more thinking. This is the first step in the right direction.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen