Czech president compares EU to Soviet Union

[Kippari]

Czech president compares EU to Soviet Union



By CONSTANT BRAND, Associated Press Writer Constant Brand, Associated Press Writer – Thu Feb 19, 8:17 am ET


BRUSSELS – The European Union has turned into an undemocratic and elitist project comparable to the Communist dictatorships of eastern Europe that forbade alternative thinking, Czech President Vaclav Klaus told the European Parliament on Thursday.
Klaus, whose country now holds the rotating EU presidency, set out a scathing attack on the EU project and its institutions, provoking boos from many lawmakers, some of whom walked out, but applause from nationalists and other anti-EU legislators.
Klaus is known for deep skepticism of the EU and has refused to fly the EU flag over his official seat in Prague during the Czech presidency, saying the country is not an EU province.
He said current EU practices smacked of communist times when the Soviet Union controlled much of eastern Europe, including the Czech Republic and when dissent or even discussions were not tolerated.
"Not so long ago, in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition," said Klaus. "We learned the bitter lesson that with no opposition, there is no freedom."
He said the 27-nation bloc should concentrate on offering prosperity to Europeans, rather than closer political union, and scrap a stalled EU reform treaty that Irish voters have already rejected.
Klaus said that questioning deeper integration has become an "uncriticizable assumption that there is only one possible and correct future of the European integration."
"The enforcement of these notions ... is unacceptable," Klaus said. "Those who dare thinking about a different option are labeled as enemies." Observers had been expecting Klaus to deliver a critical speech during his first and only visit to the EU chamber at a time when his country holds the EU limelight as chair of the 27-nation bloc.
"I have never experienced a situation where the presidency of the European Union ... compares the EU with the Soviet Union," said Belgian lawmaker Ivo Belet.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090219/ap_on_re_eu/eu_eu_czech_skepticism_1

Hilarious man!

Delete if repost.

(http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090219/ap_on_re_eu/eu_eu_czech_skepticism_1)

[0rphie]

Once Czech stop getting "free lunch" they start to whine.

[Anomander]

:| ... ok. If we are the CCCP reborn he wouldn't even be standing thererofl He's right about one thing thing though, EU needs more critisim, discussion and more serious journalistic coverage. Not the usual OMG! the bananas are straight!!!

[mj78]

I love him, he´s classic. :) With his statements about global heating and EU etc.

[Red_Rage]

LoL. They were complaining under SU, now they are complaining under EU! rofl Priceless rofl

Well, never-happy Eastern European freedom fighting nationalist states are a EU problem now.

[mj78]

Yes we complain, because we didn´t feel like respected member of EU. There are states who founded EU and then the rest, Eastern countries.

[Telmar]

I love him, he´s classic. :) With his statements about global heating and EU etc.

Not to mention his comments on the financial crisis not being very serious!

Klaus is a man of the past.

[Macs.]

"We learned the bitter lesson that with no opposition, there is no freedom."

...said the man who is the President of the country that currently holds the EU presidency. :cantbeli:

[AlfredoTP]

Yes we complain, because we didn´t feel like respected member of EU. There are states who founded EU and then the rest, Eastern countries.

Well, there are 'western' EU countries, which weren't part of the EU founders. To say 'awww, it's because we are from the eastern part...bla bla bla' doesn't work. Everybody has to work and to share, and less bla bla bla. It's that easy!
EU is not that great...at least not yet. The EU politics suck big time, has to become better, but it just started, so... Instead of badmouthing, and complaining, what about giving some useful ideas, efforts, etc.? :slap:

[1curious]

Gee, this is bizarre...

A guy that does not listen to the wishes of 70% of his own people demanding to scrap a foreign AMD on Czech soil, said this:

"Not so long ago, in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition,"

So permitting the opposition and listening to it are two different things?

What is he complaining about?

[Uwe]

Gee, this is bizarre...

A guy that does not listen to the wishes of 70% of his own people demanding to scrap a foreign AMD on Czech soil, said this:

"Not so long ago, in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition,"

So permitting the opposition and listening to it are two different things?

What is he complaining about?

Is your president always listening to the voice of people regarding national security? I dont thing so...

[a_very_ex_STAB]

:| ... ok. If we are the CCCP reborn he wouldn't even be standing thererofl He's right about one thing thing though, EU needs more critisim, discussion and more serious journalistic coverage. Not the usual OMG! the bananas are straight!!!

Well it hasn't got there yet but the EU could be at the top of a slippery slope. If you're a journo in Belgium and you ask too many awkward questions about fraud/corruption etc in the EU commission you're likely to have the Belgian police knocking on your door eventually. Sound familiar?

[1curious]

Is your president always listening to the voice of people regarding national security? I dont thing so...
I don't think so either but he does not whine...

[mj78]

Yes he´s totally man of the past.

When we are so respected why there are some members who are trying to manage their own peace talkings when there was Israeli/Palestine conflict. Why they didn´t co-operate with us?

[Uwe]

I don't think so either but he does not whine...


He is against federalised EU, as you can see in Lisabon treaty... Not everybody whats to lived in federalised EU under the rule of Sarko/Merkel..

And he is not whining...

[Uwe]

Yes he´s totally man of the past.

When we are so respected why there are some members who are trying to manage their own peace talkings when there was Israeli/Palestine conflict. Why they didn´t co-operate with us?

Sarkozy wants his piece of power and fame... Thats why he was trying to manage peacetalks on his own.

[gazell]

Co-operation does not mean blind agreement on everything and there are other representatives with doubts about how the European Parlaiment operates.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVeMBNB0cII&feature=related

[1curious]

There is an inherent inefficiency in a 27-member body. It flows in many direction and has many natural sources.

Either the members put up with it (because there are advantages) or they come up with a better system. I have no opinion on it since I am not a European and don't live in Europe currently.

What I was commenting on is the irony of a situation when my country is dragged into another country (AMD) against the wishes of its own population by the President who complains about not being heard. That's whining in my book.

And, BTW, I don't support AMD in either Czech republic nor Poland. It's for your people to decide, but I don't believe it's good for my country.

And since your government is dragging us against the wishes of its own people I find it highly ironic if democratic - coming from those who did not accumulate much democratic experience yet. It's not a disrespectful statement, I like and study Eastern Europe, it's statement of fact.

[DS73]

Well it hasn't got there yet but the EU could be at the top of a slippery slope. If you're a journo in Belgium and you ask too many awkward questions about fraud/corruption etc in the EU commission you're likely to have the Belgian police knocking on your door eventually. Sound familiar?
No, it doesn't sound familiar.
Could you provide some examples?

[gazell]

It might well be ironic, but surely they have a right to criticise something they disagree with, whether they are right or wrong, is another matter.

[Hyde]

I read about the incident in the Eu Parliament yesterday...the headline was like "The EU hating Czech President causes Scandal in the European Parialement, gets booed!"
Then I was expecting big stuff...and what did it turn out he said? He asked the EU Parlamentarians if they really feel that they are representatives of the people in the countries they are coming from and if they think that really all of the decisions they are voting on should be made in Bruxelles and maybe not better in the member states themselves. He further said that the distance between the Parliament and the people in the member states is too big and the Lissabon-Contract would only make it worse and increase the gap between the citizens and the EU. Some of the lazy-as# parliamentarians left the building, some booed and most of them talked themselves into finding him and the things he says ridiculous.
At first I didn't get what the big deal was since the stuff he says is mostly true, no one here knows any one of these parliamentarians, no one I know voted for them, these people have no bonding to the citizens in the countries they come from, the Lissabon-Contract has been voted against by the people in a lot of the member states (he can only be ratified if all states adopt it) and after that the EU Parliament realized it failed, so they just changed that it doesn't need public voting and then the Ministers and Governments could just adopt it against the peoples will. Then after a while I figured, this man is doing just what the whole idea of democracy and the European Union is based on, which is being able to criticize and question things that obviously aren't right and which are not supported or wanted by the people, and the lazy parlamentarians which live off the peoples money and get HUUUGE amounts of money for just signing their name onto a paper every day even if they don't attend the meeting (they just go there to sign their name and head back, sometimes they even form groups and each day another one goes and signs all of them in) don't like that someone is trying to take away their power and give it back to the people who are paying for this whole EU stuff...so the media creates a big deal, like in mao china or the soviet union, out of nothing....i can not really describe what is going on but everyone should be able to figure it out.

[DS73]

Yes we complain, because we didn´t feel like respected member of EU. There are states who founded EU and then the rest, Eastern countries.
This is incorrect division.
It would be more appropriate to divide EU on countries that give money and those that get. Czechia is on receiving end.
Anyway czechs wanted themself to enter EU(unlike WP). And unlike WP times nobody holds tanks on czech soil, so you're free to leave.
Make referendum and leave EU, what's the point in whining? (the same's applied to UK and other eurosceptic countries).
And before critisizing Lisbon treaty please read what it's about.
One of the main points there is the check of big three. Exactly mechanisms (not existing now) that make impossible for big three (Germany, France, UK) to "conspire" against the croud of many "little" countries.

[Telmar]

Sarkozy wants his piece of power and fame... Thats why he was trying to manage peacetalks on his own.

That for sure, and maybe a few other reasons...

Topolanek is'nt really impressive in stature. He probably does not get that many doors open.

IMO the Czech Republic would not have generated peacetalks in the latest Gaza crisis. The door being open, Sarko rushed in. Difficult to complain, he took nothing away from the Czech presidency as there was nothing going on this field.

Sarko let Topolanek take care of the gas crisis. But in the end Barroso seemed much more present than the Czech representatives. Granted that Topolanek has a lot to do at home and does not have the back office Sarko has.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

No, it doesn't sound familiar.
Could you provide some examples?

A couple of years back when the annual fuss about the EU commission's auditors refusing to sign-off the accounts because of fraud was going on some journos in Belgium who asked too many awkward questions started getting harassed by the local filth.

It was in reputable papers here in the UK at the time but I can't be arrsed to go digging for it right now.

[daily666]

It's funny to listen and to call Klaus an idiot, but the idea of comparing the EU to some socialist state is nothing new, especially for the Brits. Klaus needs some more weighted approach when comes to foreign affairs. Nor sure but he's even more hilarious that Poland's Kaczynski.

I do not agree with Czech President, but the it's damned frustrating to read members from western Europe that blame everything that's eurosceptic on Eastern Europeans. I mean it was France, The Netherlands and Ireland who blasted the Lisbon Treaty/EU Constitution into oblivion.

[DS73]

A couple of years back when the annual fuss about the EU commission's auditors refusing to sign-off the accounts because of fraud was going on some journos in Belgium who asked too many awkward questions started getting harassed by the local filth.

It was in reputable papers here in the UK at the time but I can't be arrsed to go digging for it right now.
Thanks, apparently it's something like that:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article458776.ece
I'll dig a bit :D

[Kaapeli]

Unlike in the Soviet Union Czech is free to resign from EU anytime.
But I don't think Klaus is ready to say goodbye to all the subsidies EU is paying the Czech.

[Kerrow]

I read about the incident in the Eu Parliament yesterday...the headline was like "The EU hating Czech President causes Scandal in the European Parialement, gets booed!"
Then I was expecting big stuff...and what did it turn out he said? He asked the EU Parlamentarians if they really feel that they are representatives of the people in the countries they are coming from and if they think that really all of the decisions they are voting on should be made in Bruxelles and maybe not better in the member states themselves. He further said that the distance between the Parliament and the people in the member states is too big and the Lissabon-Contract would only make it worse and increase the gap between the citizens and the EU. Some of the lazy-as# parliamentarians left the building, some booed and most of them talked themselves into finding him and the things he says ridiculous.
At first I didn't get what the big deal was since the stuff he says is mostly true, no one here knows any one of these parliamentarians, no one I know voted for them, these people have no bonding to the citizens in the countries they come from, the Lissabon-Contract has been voted against by the people in a lot of the member states (he can only be ratified if all states adopt it) and after that the EU Parliament realized it failed, so they just changed that it doesn't need public voting and then the Ministers and Governments could just adopt it against the peoples will. Then after a while I figured, this man is doing just what the whole idea of democracy and the European Union is based on, which is being able to criticize and question things that obviously aren't right and which are not supported or wanted by the people, and the lazy parlamentarians which live off the peoples money and get HUUUGE amounts of money for just signing their name onto a paper every day even if they don't attend the meeting (they just go there to sign their name and head back, sometimes they even form groups and each day another one goes and signs all of them in) don't like that someone is trying to take away their power and give it back to the people who are paying for this whole EU stuff...so the media creates a big deal, like in mao china or the soviet union, out of nothing....i can not really describe what is going on but everyone should be able to figure it out.

Pretty much the same here, heard about a big scandal, but after hearing the speech, he didn't say anything so "radical".

Yes Klaus exagerates about a lot of things, and his statements make him look really silly sometimes. I don't agree about with him on other topics, but in this case, he's got the point.

Press is just hunting for those 2" titles for a front page, so they twist the words, that together with Klaus's speech style makes him look like a total idiot in the media sometimes.

[Anomander]

Well it hasn't got there yet but the EU could be at the top of a slippery slope. If you're a journo in Belgium and you ask too many awkward questions about fraud/corruption etc in the EU commission you're likely to have the Belgian police knocking on your door eventually. Sound familiar?

Well hailing from Finland i don't know anything about the
Belgian police. I agree with you in the sence that you cant make one country of Europe, many have tried and it have always ended in disaster. Still i think EU is a way to prevent more useless european wars. The politic side of it all have gotten too much attention though. Its trough scientific advancements, cooperation and clever use of our politic leverage that we might gain an advantage.

[Rumcajs]

Unlike in the Soviet Union Czech is free to resign from EU anytime.
But I don't think Klaus is ready to say goodbye to all the subsidies EU is paying the Czech.


hey you, wake up, Klaus is just Czech president (unforunately), without real political power according Czech constitution, he is shame of Czech politics, mastodon from the past, caricature of a conservative politician, just only provocateur, NOT the Czech nation and people, don´t mix the Czechs with idiotic Klaus, who became a president even due to communistic members of Parliament support and because his own political party needed to get rid of this political cadaver. Absolute majority of the Czech nation has voted for the EU membership and they are still for EU. Stop to say any rubbish about EU subsidies (Czech Republic will got subsidies till 2013, after that will pay as well) and try to use your brain...

[mj78]

http://www.clicksmilies.com/auswahl/aktion033.gif (http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/aktion/action-smilies.html)


(http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/aktion/action-smilies.html)

[Kitsune]

There is nothing wrong with feeling scepticism with regards to some aspects of the present day European Union. Additionally Klaus is a liberal, and it is my opinion that Europe needs every single liberal it can get (European liberal, not what Americans mean when they use that word).
But comparing the EU to the Sovietunion? Nah. That kind of statement is hardly original anymore, and it is also simply wrong. As is proven by the fact that Klaus was able to voice this amount of harsh criticism without being run over by a tank.

[Henry's Fork]

so the media creates a big deal, like in mao china or the soviet union, out of nothing....

WTF?!?! As i doubt that English is your native tounge, what are you really trying to say? That Mao and the Soviet Unions tyrany is all media fabrications out of nothing?

[lauris71]

The irony is, that EP is the only directly elected organ of European Union. At least for me they represent more the spirit of democracy than commission and council.
And AFAIK the original idea of EP was precisely, that the members do not represent their countries (that is why there is council), but "the people of EU".

[gazell]

As is proven by the fact that Klaus was able to voice this amount of harsh criticism without being run over by a tank.

As he is proven right by the fact of being stamped into the ground about it.p-)

Unfortunatily, he is more of a man in my view than the European comission, so there I have a problem of chosing between a man of long standing virtue or criminals, what a hard choice, I have to read this blooming treaty, to make up me own mind.:roll:

[Kitsune]

As he is proven right by the fact of being stamped into the ground about it.
Well, it's a free country, isn't it? Anyone here can voice his opinion, and there is nothing you Klaus adherents can do about that. p-)

[gazell]

Well, it's a free country, isn't it? Anyone here can voice his opinion, and there is nothing you Klaus adherents can do about that. p-)

You put it right man, I think. Oh, bugger...

[gilgoul]

The fact is, laws and executive decisions for all states are being enacted by bureaucrats who don't represent anyone but themselves.
Take the laws on arm possessions that went into effect in the mid 90's as an example. They suddenly restricted the sell and possession of a vast array of weapons for law abiding EU citizens.
And what with the regulations that killed the country side markets by imposing refrigeration, or forbiding the sell of live animals on markets, and thus brought a fatal blow to plenty of small farmers who were scrapping their economic survival through those markets.
There are hundreds of examples of those decisions taken in Brussels, without possibility of check and balance.
And when one complains, or simply expresses his doubts about the apparent purposes of the EU, he is compared to some fascist asshat.

[Eye]

The fact is, laws and executive decisions for all states are being enacted by bureaucrats who don't represent anyone but themselves.
Take the laws on arm possessions that went into effect in the mid 90's as an example. They suddenly restricted the sell and possession of a vast array of weapons for law abiding EU citizens.
And what with the regulations that killed the country side markets by imposing refrigeration, or forbiding the sell of live animals on markets, and thus brought a fatal blow to plenty of small farmers who were scrapping their economic survival through those markets.
There are hundreds of examples of those decisions taken in Brussels, without possibility of check and balance.
And when one complains, or simply expresses his doubts about the apparent purposes of the EU, he is compared to some fascist asshat.
X 2
We have here in Poland about four times more clerks than during communistic times because of EU standards. Who pay for them? And it's not only cost of their salary and offices , but cost of lots harmful decisions made by them without any personal responsibility.

[afreu]

There are numerous ways for the governments of the member states, lobbyists and civil society organisations to influence decision making in the European Union. Some people need to accept that if we want an integrated Europe, a single market, a level playing field with the same rules and regulations that there always will be small groups of people whos interests may be negatively affected.

BTW, I haven't heard of country side markets being killed by EU regulation yet. At least where I come from (Germany) I didn't notice something like that.

//edit: decisions aren't made by some clerks in the member states. The national legislative bodies are responsible for translating EU regulation into national law.

[Eye]

Some people need to accept that if we want an integrated Europe, a single market, a level playing field with the same rules and regulations that there always will be small groups of people whos interests may be negatively affected.
Why the same rules? Can't we just establish common market and let member states to compete by lowering taxes or simplification the law?
We don't have to have the same taxes or laws to implement free market.
Competition is the way to progress. Standardization is the way to stagnation.

[tea drinker]

Well, it's a free country, isn't it? Anyone here can voice his opinion, and there is nothing you Klaus adherents can do about that. p-)
Problem is we expect the establishment to be fair and intelligent, and are bitterly dissapointed when it isn't.
In any event, given the real links between big industry, media and government, one can draw comparisons to Soviet Union in practically any country. Also the human dynamic applies in the same way, a little bit of fear and the offer of safety and position will make people do literally ANYTHING, including sailing their own country down the drain.

The guy makes valid points and it's good to debate them, even if you don't agree it increases understanding, even watching how he is attacked is good education, at this point he may be predicting this and manipulating the media himself!

[Eye]

Below text of Klaus's speech. Just to know what are we talking about.



Speech of the President of the Czech Republic Václav Klaus in the European Parliament

Mr. Chairman, Members of European Parliament,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

First of all, I would like to thank you for the possibility to speak here, in the European Parliament, in one of the key institutions of the European Union. I have been here several times but never before had an opportunity to speak at a plenary session. Therefore I do appreciate your invitation. The elected representatives of 27 countries with a broad spectrum of political opinions and views make a unique auditorium, as unique and in essence as revolutionary as the experiment of the European Union itself. For more than half a century, the EU has attempted to make decision-making in Europe better by moving a significant part of decisions from the individual states to the European institutions.

I’ve come here from the capital of the Czech Republic, from Prague, from the historic centre of the Czech statehood, from one of the important places where European thinking, European culture and European civilisation has emerged and developed. I come as a representative of the Czech state, which has always, in all its various forms, been part of the European history, of a state, that has many times taken a direct and important part in shaping this history, and which wants to continue shaping it also today.

Nine years have passed since the president of the Czech Republic last spoke to you. That was my predecessor, Václav Havel, and it was four years before our accession to the European Union. Several weeks ago, the Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolánek, also held a speech here, as a leader of a country presiding over the EU Council. His speech focused on topics, based on the priorities of the Czech presidency, as well as on the topical problems the EU countries are facing now.

This allows me to focus on issues that are more general, and – at first sight – perhaps less dramatic than solving the current economic crisis, the Ukrainian-Russian gas conflict, or the Gaza situation. I do believe, however, these issues are of extraordinary importance for the further development of the European integration project.

In less than three months, the Czech Republic will commemorate the fifth anniversary of its EU accession. We will commemorate it with dignity. We will commemorate it as a country, which – unlike some other new member countries – does not feel disappointed over unfulfilled expectations connected with our membership. This is no surprise to me and there is a rational explanation for it. Our expectations were realistic. We knew well that we were entering a community formed and shaped by human beings. We knew it was not a utopian construction, put together without authentic human interests, visions, views and ideas. These interests as well as ideas can be found all over the EU and it cannot be otherwise.

We interpreted our EU accession on one hand as a confirmation of the fact that we had managed, quite rapidly, over less than fifteen years since the fall of communism, to become a standard European country again. On the other hand, we considered (and we still do) the opportunity to actively take part in the European integration process as a chance to take advantage of the already highly integrated Europe and – at the same time – to influence this process according to our views. We feel our share of responsibility for the development of the European Union and with this feeling of responsibility we approach our presidency of the EU Council. I believe that the first six weeks of the Czech presidency have convincingly demonstrated our responsible attitude.

At this forum, I would like to repeat once again clearly and loudly – for those of you who don’t know it or do not want to know – my conviction, that for us there was and there is no alternative to the European Union membership and that in our country there is no relevant political force that could or would want to undermine this position. We have been therefore really touched by the repeated and growing attacks we have been facing; attacks based on the unfounded assumption that the Czechs are searching for some other integration project than the one they became members of five years ago. This is not true.

The citizens of the Czech Republic feel that the European integration has an important and needed mission and task. It can be summarized in the following way:

- removing unnecessary – and for human freedom and prosperity counterproductive – barriers to the free movement of people, goods, services, ideas, political philosophies, world views, cultural patterns and behaviour models that have been for various reasons over the centuries formed among the individual European states;

- a joint care of the public goods, existing on the continental level, meaning projects that cannot be effectively carried out through bilateral negotiations of two (or more) neighbouring European countries.

The efforts to realise these two objectives – removing barriers and rationally selecting issues that should be solved at the continental level – are not and will never be completed. Various barriers and obstacles still remain and the decision-making at the Brussels level is certainly more numerous than would be optimal. Certainly there are more numerous than the people in the individual member states ask for. You, Members of the European Parliament, are certainly well aware of this. The question I want to ask you is therefore a purely theoretical one: are you really convinced that every time you take a vote, you are deciding something that must be decided here in this hall and not closer to the citizens, i.e. inside the individual European states?

In the politically correct rhetoric we keep hearing these days, we often hear about other possible effects of European integration, which are, however, of lesser and secondary importance. These are, moreover, driven by the ambitions of professional politicians and the people connected to them, not by the interests of ordinary citizens of the member states.

When I said, that the European Union membership did not have and does not have any alternative; I only mentioned half of what must be said. The other – logical – half of my statement is that the methods and forms of European integration do, on the contrary, have quite a number of possible and legitimate variants, just as they proved to have in the last half century. There is no end of history. Claiming that the status quo, the present institutional form of the EU, is a forever uncriticizable dogma, is a mistake that has been – unfortunately – rapidly spreading, even though it is in direct contradiction not only with rational thinking, but also with the whole two-thousand-year history of European civilization. The same mistake applies to the a priori postulated, and therefore equally uncriticizable, assumption that there is only one possible and correct future of the European integration, which is the “ever-closer Union”, i.e. advancement towards deeper and deeper political integration of the member countries.

Neither the present status quo, nor the assumption that the permanent deepening of the integration is a blessing, is – or should be – a dogma for any European democrat. The enforcement of these notions by those, who consider themselves – to use the phrase of the famous Czech writer Milan Kundera – “the owners of the keys” to European integration, is unacceptable.

Moreover, it is self evident, that one or another institutional arrangement of the European Union is not an objective in itself; but a tool for achieving the real objectives. These are nothing but human freedom and such economic system that would bring prosperity. That system is a market economy.

This would certainly be the wish of the citizens of all member countries. Yet, over the twenty years since the fall of communism, I have been repeatedly witnessing that the feelings and fears are stronger among those who spent a great part of the 20th century without freedom and struggled under a dysfunctional centrally planned and state-administered economy. It is no surprise that these people are more sensitive and responsive to any phenomena and tendencies leading in other directions than towards freedom and prosperity. The citizens of the Czech Republic are among those I’m talking about.

The present decision making system of the European Union is different from a classic parliamentary democracy, tested and proven by history. In a normal parliamentary system, part of the MPs support the government and part support the opposition. In the European parliament, this arrangement has been missing. Here, only one single alternative is being promoted and those who dare thinking about a different option are labelled as enemies of the European integration. Not so long ago, in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition. It was through this experience that we learned the bitter lesson that with no opposition, there is no freedom. That is why political alternatives must exist.

And not only that. The relationship between a citizen of one or another member state and a representative of the Union is not a standard relationship between a voter and a politician, representing him or her. There is also a great distance (not only in a geographical sense) between citizens and Union representatives, which is much greater than it is the case inside the member countries. This distance is often described as the democratic deficit, the loss of democratic accountability, the decision making of the unelected – but selected – ones, as bureaucratisation of decision making etc. The proposals to change the current state of affairs – included in the rejected European Constitution or in the not much different Lisbon Treaty – would make this defect even worse.

Since there is no European demos – and no European nation – this defect cannot be solved by strengthening the role of the European parliament either. This would, on the contrary, make the problem worse and lead to an even greater alienation between the citizens of the European countries and Union institutions. The solution will be neither to add fuel to the “melting pot” of the present type of European integration, nor to suppress the role of member states in the name of a new multicultural and multinational European civil society. These are attempts that have failed every time in the past, because they did not reflect the spontaneous historical development.

I fear that the attempts to speed up and deepen integration and to move decisions about the lives of the citizens of the member countries up to the European level can have effects that will endanger all the positive things achieved in Europe in the last half a century. Let us not underestimate the fears of the citizens of many member countries, who are afraid, that their problems are again decided elsewhere and without them, and that their ability to influence these decisions is very limited. So far, the European Union has been successful, partly thanks to the fact that the vote of each member country had the same weight and thus could not be ignored. Let us not allow a situation where the citizens of member countries would live their lives with a resigned feeling that the EU project is not their own; that it is developing differently than they would wish, that they are only forced to accept it. We would very easily and very soon slip back to the times that we hoped belonged to history.

This is closely connected with the question of prosperity. We must say openly that the present economic system of the EU is a system of a suppressed market, a system of a permanently strengthening centrally controlled economy. Although history has more than clearly proven that this is a dead end, we find ourselves walking the same path once again. This results in a constant rise in both the extent of government masterminding and constraining of spontaneity of the market processes. In recent months, this trend has been further reinforced by incorrect interpretation of the causes of the present economic and financial crisis, as if it was caused by free market, while in reality it is just the contrary – caused by political manipulation of the market. It is again necessary to point out to the historical experience of our part of Europe and to the lessons we learned from it.

Many of you certainly know the name of the French economist Frederic Bastiat and his famous Petition of the Candlemakers, which has become a well-known and canonical reading, illustrating the absurdity of political interventions in the economy. On 14 November 2008 the European Commission approved a real, not a fictitious Bastiat’s Petition of the Candlemakers, and imposed a 66% tariff on candles imported from China. I would have never believed that a 160-year-old essay could become a reality, but it has happened. An inevitable effect of the extensive implementation of such measures in Europe is economic slowdown, if not a complete halt of economic growth. The only solution is liberalisation and deregulation of the European economy.

I say all of this because I do feel a strong responsibility for the democratic and prosperous future of Europe. I have been trying to remind you of the elementary principles upon which European civilisation has been based for centuries or even millennia; principles, the validity of which is not affected by time, principles that are universal and should be therefore followed even in the present European Union. I am convinced that the citizens of individual member countries do want freedom, democracy and economic prosperity.

At this moment in time, the most important task is to make sure that free discussion about these problems is not silenced as an attack on the very idea of European integration. We have always believed that being allowed to discuss such serious issues, being heard, defending everyone’s right to present a different than “the only correct opinion” – no matter how much we may disagree with it – is at the very core of the democracy we were denied for over four decades. We, who went through the involuntary experience that taught us that a free exchange of opinions and ideas is the basic condition for a healthy democracy, do hope, that this condition will be met and respected also in the future. This is the opportunity and the only method for making the European Union more free, more democratic and more prosperous.

Václav Klaus, European Parliament, Brussels,
19 February 2009

http://www.klaus.cz/klaus2/asp/clanek.asp?id=88EY96UW9zlp

[perdurabo]

There is nothing wrong with feeling scepticism with regards to some aspects of the present day European Union. Additionally Klaus is a liberal, and it is my opinion that Europe needs every single liberal it can get (European liberal, not what Americans mean when they use that word).
But comparing the EU to the Sovietunion? Nah. That kind of statement is hardly original anymore, and it is also simply wrong. As is proven by the fact that Klaus was able to voice this amount of harsh criticism without being run over by a tank.
I agree that Europe needs scepticism but more we need is constrictive critics, not destroying EU but changing it! I realy love EU idea being able to live, work trade wherever in Europe without mutch hassle with borders and other sh*t, but they are overdoing with too mutch papers they produce in Brussels, too mutch controll over things that we don't need to controll while too litle cooperation in fields we should work together (defence, foregin politics espetially estern, Russia wants to negotiate with countries, while it should be done on EU-Russia level)

[DS73]

...
He has typical speach of "I have gay friends but..."
Boring.
The whole idea that instruments, working in 10mln country would work in 500mln loose confederation of so different countries, is not even naive. It's insane.
At present EU is mimicking US in a sense, that all real decisions are done through lobbying. Country has to identify and express their interests, find supporting partners and to be persistent in stating and adjusting their position considering common interests and conflicting situations.

Of course there are multiple pan european parties.
European People's Party or EPP,
Party of European Socialists(PES),
European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party
etc. etc. etc.
These parties participate, expressing their political opinions, not only in EP but in commissions as well.

Obviously any idiot not capable to provide constructive critics (that is to provide alternative solutions) is what he is, an idiot, working against institutions he criticizes.

[freak77power]

EU is evil. EU is nothing but Forth Reich gathered around Germany. I can't wait for a day when EU collapses, it will be better for other nations who are oppressed by EU or blindely want to be part of EU.

[Red_Rage]

EU is evil. EU is nothing but Forth Reich gathered around Germany. I can't wait for a day when EU collapses, it will be better for other nations who are oppressed by EU or blindely want to be part of EU.


A bit of heads up:

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/3603/trollweb.jpg

[Red_Rage]

defence, foregin politics espetially estern, Russia wants to negotiate with countries, while it should be done on EU-Russia level


So Poland, Czech Republic and the Baltics could torpedo successful and mutually profitable Russia/Germany and Russia/France agreements to push their own nationalistic agendas?

[perdurabo]

So Poland, Czech Republic and the Baltics could torpedo successful and mutually profitable Russia/Germany and Russia/France agreements to push their own nationalistic agendas?
:cantbeli:Because Germany and France thinks about security of mentioned countries right? Sorry dude but i'm not aginst doing busines with Russia but i'm for talks with Russia to benefit ALL EU and Russia.

[Hyde]

WTF?!?! As i doubt that English is your native tounge, what are you really trying to say? That Mao and the Soviet Unions tyrany is all media fabrications out of nothing?

No, but that in repressive states, people who voiced their opinion and/or concerns against actions of the current leadership or the way the current leadership is handling things, were, when it was possible, locked away in silence, and when it wasn't, maybe because he was a politician or musician or any other kind of person with public presence and sympathy, the media was used to label him as a dissident and enemy of the state to publicly put him in a position where he could be dealt with (e.g. locked away, fired, suspended, removed from his position etc.) without causing to much outrage among the public/citizens. And this is not limited to soviet or mao regimes, but also in other dictatorships and even in "democratic" countries.


Edit:

I cut out the important and "eu-critic" part of his speech, posted one page back, for people to make their own opinion about this "scandal" he caused and maybe to understand why I do not like to follow media caused outrage and tend to take things a little colder than they are served.

"The present decision making system of the European Union is different from a classic parliamentary democracy, tested and proven by history. In a normal parliamentary system, part of the MPs support the government and part support the opposition. In the European parliament, this arrangement has been missing. Here, only one single alternative is being promoted and those who dare thinking about a different option are labelled as enemies of the European integration. Not so long ago, in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition. It was through this experience that we learned the bitter lesson that with no opposition, there is no freedom. That is why political alternatives must exist.

And not only that. The relationship between a citizen of one or another member state and a representative of the Union is not a standard relationship between a voter and a politician, representing him or her. There is also a great distance (not only in a geographical sense) between citizens and Union representatives, which is much greater than it is the case inside the member countries. This distance is often described as the democratic deficit, the loss of democratic accountability, the decision making of the unelected – but selected – ones, as bureaucratisation of decision making etc. The proposals to change the current state of affairs – included in the rejected European Constitution or in the not much different Lisbon Treaty – would make this defect even worse.

Since there is no European demos – and no European nation – this defect cannot be solved by strengthening the role of the European parliament either. This would, on the contrary, make the problem worse and lead to an even greater alienation between the citizens of the European countries and Union institutions. The solution will be neither to add fuel to the “melting pot” of the present type of European integration, nor to suppress the role of member states in the name of a new multicultural and multinational European civil society. These are attempts that have failed every time in the past, because they did not reflect the spontaneous historical development.

I fear that the attempts to speed up and deepen integration and to move decisions about the lives of the citizens of the member countries up to the European level can have effects that will endanger all the positive things achieved in Europe in the last half a century. Let us not underestimate the fears of the citizens of many member countries, who are afraid, that their problems are again decided elsewhere and without them, and that their ability to influence these decisions is very limited. So far, the European Union has been successful, partly thanks to the fact that the vote of each member country had the same weight and thus could not be ignored. Let us not allow a situation where the citizens of member countries would live their lives with a resigned feeling that the EU project is not their own; that it is developing differently than they would wish, that they are only forced to accept it. We would very easily and very soon slip back to the times that we hoped belonged to history."

[gazell]

He has typical speach of "I have gay friends but..."
Boring.
The whole idea that instruments, working in 10mln country would work in 500mln loose confederation of so different countries, is not even naive. It's insane.
At present EU is mimicking US in a sense, that all real decisions are done through lobbying. Country has to identify and express their interests, find supporting partners and to be persistent in stating and adjusting their position considering common interests and conflicting situations.



Of course there are multiple pan european parties.
European People's Party or EPP,
Party of European Socialists(PES),
European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party
etc. etc. etc.
These parties participate, expressing their political opinions, not only in EP but in commissions as well.

Obviously any idiot not capable to provide constructive critics (that is to provide alternative solutions) is what he is, an idiot, working against institutions he criticizes.

So, do I read you right? We cannot afford other opinion in order of the common good, as we shall never get on, because all these people shall never agree with each other, so the view that some find 'not idiotic' needs to be forced on all for the common good. Is that it, or am I misunderstanding?

[DS73]

So, do I read you right? We cannot afford other opinion in order of the common good, as we shall never get on, because all these people shall never agree with each other, so the view that some find 'not idiotic' needs to be forced on all for the common good. Is that it, or am I misunderstanding?
I am a bit lost in your post.
Did you understand my post as "those in the "know" have right to force their opinion on the rest"?
I never said it, more of it, I said and keep saying that EU is nor close neither "bureaucratic" in pure sense. It's readily open to political influences, and the current stride to "consolidate" it's legal system is exactly the result of complains and proposals of multiple political parties, "think tanks", and movements in Europe. If czech or hungarians feel "left out", it's purely their fault. They don't bother to participate.
EU is a moving train, and the curent idea of multiple speeds is more the result of inexperience of ex WP countries in EU politics, than the difference in countries' economical health.

To finish about this czesh president.
Politicians don't have luxury of expressing "opinions."
If they express critics of smb actions they have to provide both valid arguments and alternative solutions. Of course if they are real politicians and not some permanent opposition clowns.

For example he presented the example of "candles", apparently such "order" amused him.
But I am sure the protectionist measures are not silly for european canddle producers, who are squeezed by protected and heavily subsidized chinese companies.
Just like financial protectionist measures weren't silly for czech bank industry during 90s.
This guy is hypocrite or idiot. Pick your choice.

Free trade assumes equal initial conditions. It never happens, so there will be never "free trade" in real sense. Even inside EU the majority of trade is done using bilateral agreements.

Chinese understand "free trade" as the right to sell everywhere their crap, americans understand "free trade" as the right to buy anything anywhere on their terms, russians understand "free trade" as the monopoly to do what they like the most: to dictate their will.

[BAF]

well nobody's stopping him to get the **** out

[Red_Rage]

:cantbeli:Because Germany and France thinks about security of mentioned countries right? Sorry dude but i'm not aginst doing busines with Russia but i'm for talks with Russia to benefit ALL EU and Russia.


And how will that work? EU does not represent economic equality across the board - some are winners (Germany), some are barely hanging on and some are clear losers (Baltics). Every state has different economic needs and it is much more efficient to deal directly with a partner country than go through the EU (and Russia has been pretty open to constructive dialogue from all EU member states).

[Itachi]

EU is evil. EU is nothing but Forth Reich gathered around Germany. I can't wait for a day when EU collapses, it will be better for other nations who are oppressed by EU or blindely want to be part of EU.sry but you...
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_BYX14125JUQ/R6AtEcajqXI/AAAAAAAAEiA/idKVU0_9t-s/s400/millionaire_idiot_fail.jpg

[perdurabo]

And how will that work? EU does not represent economic equality across the board - some are winners (Germany), some are barely hanging on and some are clear losers (Baltics). Every state has different economic needs and it is much more efficient to deal directly with a partner country than go through the EU (and Russia has been pretty open to constructive dialogue from all EU member states).
those clear loosers have stable above 3% GDP growth while winners are lagging around 1%:roll:
And yes its efficien for Russia to deal with separate states but not for those states, for egzample after Rus-Ukr gas row, Russia cut of gas supply to Poland via Belarus, without any reason from our side, they just tried to black mail us to sell them our pipelines and drop our long term signed deal (in witch there was also Yamal 2 gas papieline planned to be build, Russians want to withdraw it and build NordStream) sorry, single states like Poland or Czechs are too weak to negotiate with Russia alone. And this was one of principles in EU to be united so smaller and weaker countries could live normally without bigger ones bullying.
BTW you are Russian or German?

[Red_Rage]

those clear loosers have stable above 3% GDP growth while winners are lagging around 1%:roll:

Out of all the EU clique, Germany is the strongest player with the most solid economy... comparing German economy to Eastern European members is just silly. Estonia, Latvia, and Azerbajan (not EU, but they did show 30% economy growth per year for last few years) - on paper, they were all considered leaders in economy growth, and look at them now. Sad, sad picture.






Russia cut of gas supply to Poland via Belarus, without any reason from our side, they just tried to black mail us to sell them our pipelines and drop our long term signed deal

Sources please. The only "cut" supply for Poland via Belarus that i recall was the 5% drop in early January - hardly something to cry bloody murder over, also considering Poland had 85% ready reserves and could survive for quite some time with zero gas supply. If EU put half the energy they spent on criticizing Russia into putting pressure on Ukraine to pay its bill, there would be no gas crisis at all.

[Frutzel]

those clear loosers have stable above 3% GDP growth while winners are lagging around 1%:roll:

That hurts doesn't it. Still its a silly argument for you opinion. I know you can do better than that

[perdurabo]

Out of all the EU clique, Germany is the strongest player with the most solid economy... comparing German economy to Eastern European members is just silly. Estonia, Latvia, and Azerbajan (not EU, but they did show 30% economy growth per year for last few years) - on paper, they were all considered leaders in economy growth, and look at them now. Sad, sad picture.

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1436798,00.jpg
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,grossbild-1436798-608985,00.html

Poland looks good.



If EU put half the energy they spent on criticizing Russia into putting pressure on Ukraine to pay its bill, there would be no gas crisis at all.
I agree wit this statement. Stil i think it should be done on EU level not country.

[perdurabo]

That hurts doesn't it. Still its a silly argument for you opinion. I know you can do better than that
I'm quite happy with my country results, after 20 years from ****hole it changed into place that one can actually live in. Only thing hurts me is ppl calling us loosers while we are in quite good shape, compared to 20 years ago or rest of the post-commie countries. I think that in 2011-2012 my country will be on fast lane, cause we have stedy banking system that wasn't affected by crisis, our companies are prepared for crisis as we had one just recently in 2001-2004, also its our national speciality, we work good under heavy pressure, while we are lazy bast*rds when times are good.

[1curious]

for egzample after Rus-Ukr gas row, Russia cut of gas supply to Poland via Belarus, without any reason from our side, they just tried to black mail us to sell them our pipelines and drop our long term signed deal (in witch there was also Yamal 2 gas papieline planned to be build, Russians want to withdraw it and build NordStream)
Sorry for interfering..up to this point I thought your posts seemed reasonable and balanced. But this example has too many inaccuracies and wrong assumptions. It's practically invalid to the point of being false. You seem to have swallowed an excessive doze of domestic spin instead of investigating the issue.

For the record, I had praised Poland's pragmatic behavior during the Ukrainian-Russian crisis of 2009. My posts are still there.

[Telmar]

And when one complains, or simply expresses his doubts about the apparent purposes of the EU, he is compared to some fascist asshat.

To be clear, Klaus is the one who compared the EU to the Soviet Union.

[gazell]

I am a bit lost in your post.
Did you understand my post as "those in the "know" have right to force their opinion on the rest"?
I never said it, more of it, I said and keep saying that EU is nor close neither "bureaucratic" in pure sense. It's readily open to political influences, and the current stride to "consolidate" it's legal system is exactly the result of complains and proposals of multiple political parties, "think tanks", and movements in Europe. If czech or hungarians feel "left out", it's purely their fault. They don't bother to participate.
EU is a moving train, and the curent idea of multiple speeds is more the result of inexperience of ex WP countries in EU politics, than the difference in countries' economical health.

To finish about this czesh president.
Politicians don't have luxury of expressing "opinions."
If they express critics of smb actions they have to provide both valid arguments and alternative solutions. Of course if they are real politicians and not some permanent opposition clowns.

For example he presented the example of "candles", apparently such "order" amused him.
But I am sure the protectionist measures are not silly for european canddle producers, who are squeezed by protected and heavily subsidized chinese companies.
Just like financial protectionist measures weren't silly for czech bank industry during 90s.
This guy is hypocrite or idiot. Pick your choice.

Free trade assumes equal initial conditions. It never happens, so there will be never "free trade" in real sense. Even inside EU the majority of trade is done using bilateral agreements.

Chinese understand "free trade" as the right to sell everywhere their crap, americans understand "free trade" as the right to buy anything anywhere on their terms, russians understand "free trade" as the monopoly to do what they like the most: to dictate their will.

Thanks for explaining. I don't agree with 'this guy' on all sorts but I don't like what this has seemingly come to is name calling, there should be an argument I believe instead.

Eastern-European countries do participate and have been very keen in taking part if they have bad feelings or experience that should be discussed not dismissed. But then let's see: Klaus is an idiot dinosaur, these countries do not have democratic experiences, the Irish, well, hm, weird, the British are nutters, whatever else...

And yes, there are no civil organisations in some countries and the situation is quite different in a lot of respects and yes, a lot of industries got ruined, now there might be a plentitude of different reasons, but would be worth considering a discourse. Well, of course, who doesn't like it , can get the heck out, is that the example of constructive criticism?

There are very different legislations in a lot of respects - of course, I do not know, how it will change after Lisbon treaty -, but already a lot of troubles. Just a note on the favourite argument, you get the money: A mayor recently banged with; oh you apply for these European grants and etc, yes, I do keep applying and I'm a lawyer and have one hell of a time doing so, and we have recently won a bus, excellent , have a bus for the village, we just can't pay the 3m tax and duties to get it. Reality and theory are often different.

And now we have, the financial troubles, when all comes to show the nation states we are: the UK doesn't want foreign workers, the Italians don't want the Romanian immigrants, the Germans don't like bailing out the foreign banks, etc, everybody scraping for themselves.

I'm rather up for the EU, but criticism should be taken onboard to better things and this situation right now is a trial on how much the EU managed to take the people with them.

[perdurabo]

Sorry for interfering..up to this point I thought your posts seemed reasonable and balanced. But this example has too many inaccuracies and wrong assumptions. It's practically invalid to the point of being false. You seem to have swallowed an excessive doze of domestic spin instead of investigating the issue.

For the record, I had praised Poland's pragmatic behavior during the Ukrainian-Russian crisis of 2009. My posts are still there.
No need to sorry, well if this was false statement then sorry for badmouthing, maybe our press did f* something up witch they do often :roll:
Thank you, i also agreed with Russian stance aginst Ukraine, for me if they don't want to be Russias pet anymore and be part of western club they should pay western price. For the record i'm not russophobe i realy like their language, and reading books in it (Master and Margaret in oryginal is just perfect translation is shade of it), i'm just afraid of my country becoming Russian pet, i realy would like to see normal healthy relations (witch are spoiled by both sides, our president with his love for Georgia is just => :cantbeli:) and i'm realy afraid that Russian goverment dosen't see us as "grown up" western country thats why i would prefer larger and stronger entity - EU to stand up and do the talks. They would have A. enough power to talk with Russia like equals B. they wouldn't be biased aginst Russia and it seems our politics have issiues on this area.

[sepheronx]

No need to sorry, well if this was false statement then sorry for badmouthing, maybe our press did f* something up witch they do often :roll:
Thank you, i also agreed with Russian stance aginst Ukraine, for me if they don't want to be Russias pet anymore and be part of western club they should pay western price. For the record i'm not russophobe i realy like their language, and reading books in it (Master and Margaret in oryginal is just perfect translation is shade of it), i'm just afraid of my country becoming Russian pet, i realy would like to see normal healthy relations (witch are spoiled by both sides, our president with his love for Georgia is just => :cantbeli:) and i'm realy afraid that Russian goverment dosen't see us as "grown up" western country thats why i would prefer larger and stronger entity - EU to stand up and do the talks. They would have A. enough power to talk with Russia like equals B. they wouldn't be biased aginst Russia and it seems our politics have issiues on this area.

If EU becomes a force of its own and replaces NATO, then you can expect political ties to be more stable between Russia and the EU. But as long as NATO sits at Russia's border, you can expect them to be hesitant. And political ties are going to go further down, when and if the AMD program starts.

And calling the EU equivalent to the Soviet Union, that is just too exaggerated.

[Telmar]

...

I'm rather up for the EU, but criticism should be taken onboard to better things and this situation right now is a trial on how much the EU managed to take the people with them.

Hi Gazell

I agree with criticism being onboard but Klaus is not some guy on the street who can voice an opinion without having to back it up or to propose a solution.

That's the problem with Klaus's statements. Not the essence. The EU is going through a growth crisis with the arrival of many new countries as well as a conflict on what the goal of the union is.

It can be discussed with reasonable leaders. Not with those being voluntarily provocative.

[gazell]

Well, I might see things wrong, Telmar, and he might well just be deliberately provocative, but how you all imagine him being more co-operative, if what he is voicing is dismissed, so why would he work out a solution for problems that apperantly don't exist. doesn't there first need to be a consensus that we have this problem we would like to address?

He has done some outright silly things, I know, but:

- people are distanced from EP, huhh, is that utter rubbish?

- you need different solutions for different regions, is that utter rubbish?

- if you just shout down opposition, you can run to unpleasant fields, is that utter rubbish?

I right now feel like as if there was a hype - hopefully only a media hype against his person - and I hope I'm wrong, sometimes we need some 'nuts' who piss against the winds.

[Telmar]

OK. The problems you list are for real.

But did Klaus propose something or he is just criticizing?

Because it's easy to get people against something, but harder to get them to agree on something.

He started out nicely with the refusal to fly the EU flag. With such a stance, what does he think he will achieve.

[Eye]

OK. The problems you list are for real.


It seems those problems don't exist for UE bureaucrats. If they notice those problems it will be good start for discussion.
Now we have to find way to their awareness.

[joka]

The Czech Presidency has been a big bowl of fail, thankfully we're almost halfway through.

[DS73]

There are very different legislations in a lot of respects - of course, I do not know, how it will change after Lisbon treaty -, but already a lot of troubles. Just a note on the favourite argument, you get the money: A mayor recently banged with; oh you apply for these European grants and etc, yes, I do keep applying and I'm a lawyer and have one hell of a time doing so, and we have recently won a bus, excellent , have a bus for the village, we just can't pay the 3m tax and duties to get it. Reality and theory are often different.

I believe you are talking about local hungarian taxes. Well tough luck. I have impression that hungarian politics's caught in pissing context of showing who is the most hungarian and your politicians don't have time to do laws.


And now we have, the financial troubles, when all comes to show the nation states we are: the UK doesn't want foreign workers, the Italians don't want the Romanian immigrants, the Germans don't like bailing out the foreign banks, etc, everybody scraping for themselves.
Normal routine. It was always like that.
Before it was about italians in Germany, than about turks in Germany, later about romanian gypsies in Germany....
There is always some good reason to complain.
The only thing that changed with EU, is appearance of new place and tools to defend countries' interests or find new partners.
Just look what happened after last gas crysis.
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/703&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

Btw. British trouble with foreigners is internal british problem, if they'd aligned labour and residence rules to EU practices they wouldn't have present problems. Nobody forbides them to define strict labour regulation rules. Or introduce IDs, or change citizenship requirements.
With their stubborn "conservative liberal" stance they are digging grave for their own country. Good example for everybody else.


I'm rather up for the EU, but criticism should be taken onboard to better things and this situation right now is a trial on how much the EU managed to take the people with them.There is no problem being against EU, I personally don't care much if EU'll survive or not. The idea of "United Europe" wasn't born with EU, and definitely isn't going to die with it. So far it's the best that exists here, that is why all european countries stick with it.
And of course "the best doesn't mean it's good".
But there is a problem of exploitation of symbols (wtvr claims of evil IMF "requirements" or "pushy" EU) in mostly local propaganda. I still want to see well based complains of eastern-central european countries.

Klaus statement is great example of twisting reality and hypocrite bitching.
Not only he doesn't offer alternatives, but he's bitching about wrong stuff or shows his ignorance.
For example:

- removing unnecessary – and for human freedom and prosperity counterproductive – barriers to the free movement of people, goods, services, ideas, political philosophies, world views, cultural patterns and behaviour models that have been for various reasons over the centuries formed among the individual European states;That would be instant death for czech economics. I am sure Czechia is not ready for uncontrolled influx of chines emigrants combined with german money.

a joint care of the public goods, existing on the continental level, meaning projects that cannot be effectively carried out through bilateral negotiations of two (or more) neighbouring European countries.It's impossible to find quickly consensus between 27 members. Bilateral agreement is the only way to make things moving.

The question I want to ask you is therefore a purely theoretical one: are you really convinced that every time you take a vote, you are deciding something that must be decided here in this hall and not closer to the citizens, i.e. inside the individual European states? Before asking rhetorical question he were rather ask how topics are chosen in the first place. By definition it's something common for everybody or coming from conflicted interests (like different quotas) or humanitarian concerns.

Claiming that the status quo, the present institutional form of the EU, is a forever uncriticizable dogma, is a mistake that has been – unfortunately – rapidly spreading,this claim exists only in his head.

The same mistake applies to the a priori postulated, and therefore equally uncriticizable, assumption that there is only one possible and correct future of the European integration, which is the “ever-closer Union”, i.e. advancement towards deeper and deeper political integration of the member countries.This is not an assumption but obvious observation coming from ever escalating competition with US, China, Russia etc.
This guy is an asshole.


Moreover, it is self evident, that one or another institutional arrangement of the European Union is not an objective in itself; but a tool for achieving the real objectives. These are nothing but human freedom and such economic system that would bring prosperity. That system is a market economy. Words of an elf. He should work in university, not govern country.
"Market economy" my ass. Where does he see it?

The present decision making system of the European Union is different from a classic parliamentary democracy, tested and proven by history. In a normal parliamentary system, part of the MPs support the government and part support the opposition. In the European parliament, this arrangement has been missing.There is no government in strict sense to start with.
European comission is organized on delegated basis, where Comissioners represent states members. Typical organisation of any confederation.
Guy wants apples to taste like oranges.

I can continue.

[gazell]

Thanks, DS, and I do need to apologise as my statement was misleading there. I did not mean you personally or us in the forum, which is informal private opinions often, it rarely bothers me, but we have ended up with name calling in the European Parliament, that's a bit more serious.

And as quite a few members prove here it's not that hard not to and some issues were rather easy there, like 'No time to read the treaty before voting on', I mean, really should be a simple answer of dates and rule books, which should be well documented, is it so or not, not much to do with Adolf Hitler, I suppose.

The present Hungarian government is Farce League I, don't know how many other members, but doubt it's numerous, the tragedy is only, it's not football they are playing at.