Impacts in the European parliament after the Cameron's veto
It seems prefiguring the early-settling after the veto of Cameron at the Brussels summit during last week.
So lets foresee a short article in the yesterday's Financial Times.
Sharon Bowles is a worthy member of the British Liberal Democratic Party, which governs UK in coalition with the Conservatives. The lady is MEP and President (among other things, the first Briton) of the powerful Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee. She was extremely critical about the decision of her Prime Minister, accusing him of "jeopardising United Kingdom interests" and that "his veto has made the outcome of the summit more intergovernmental and less democratically accountable" .
As we can see a very hard stance, confirmed in other statements too.
But this is not enough, according to the FT, to avoid rumors of threats of being ousted from his position as a repercussion of what happened.
Some MEPs are, at present still pretty veiled, suggesting the Bowles to step down from his role on the basis of the fact that a British MEP at this point would not have the credibility to lead a committee that deals with issues relating to the euro zone; then, not for his expertise but because of his nationality. To confirm the statement of the climate veteran German MEP said that the time has come "to marginalize the UK so that the country come to feel its loss of influence."
I hope that all this falls within the normal political discourse. If not, it would indicate a serious lack of democracy in an institution which should instead be taken as an example. Britain is still part of the European Union, and I don't think it is fair to blame a head of state who takes a position, right or wrong, different from that "imposed". Not all countries start from a financial and economic subordination that forces them to take decisions taken by others. If old grudges and nationalist sentiments proliferates again in the most important European institution ..........no further comment.
So lets foresee a short article in the yesterday's Financial Times.
Sharon Bowles is a worthy member of the British Liberal Democratic Party, which governs UK in coalition with the Conservatives. The lady is MEP and President (among other things, the first Briton) of the powerful Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee. She was extremely critical about the decision of her Prime Minister, accusing him of "jeopardising United Kingdom interests" and that "his veto has made the outcome of the summit more intergovernmental and less democratically accountable" .
As we can see a very hard stance, confirmed in other statements too.
But this is not enough, according to the FT, to avoid rumors of threats of being ousted from his position as a repercussion of what happened.
Some MEPs are, at present still pretty veiled, suggesting the Bowles to step down from his role on the basis of the fact that a British MEP at this point would not have the credibility to lead a committee that deals with issues relating to the euro zone; then, not for his expertise but because of his nationality. To confirm the statement of the climate veteran German MEP said that the time has come "to marginalize the UK so that the country come to feel its loss of influence."
I hope that all this falls within the normal political discourse. If not, it would indicate a serious lack of democracy in an institution which should instead be taken as an example. Britain is still part of the European Union, and I don't think it is fair to blame a head of state who takes a position, right or wrong, different from that "imposed". Not all countries start from a financial and economic subordination that forces them to take decisions taken by others. If old grudges and nationalist sentiments proliferates again in the most important European institution ..........no further comment.
Commenti
Posta un commento