Those very few who don't mostly oppose the EU in general and are considered to be enemies by the rest. There is no debate, there is no democracy.
All MEPs comes from democratic elections. Every region can chose its own MEP to represent their interest. You should respect will of the people even though you disagree with the result. The public sent them there. I disagree with the fact that socialists and conservatives are in power again while liberals are far away, but I respect that that.
The fact that you disagree with the results of the debates doesn't mean that there's no democracy there. Also the fact that Parliament cooperates with the Commission is a good thing in my opinion. The last thing we need there are argues and speculations against one another.
I want to destroy only overwhelming bureaucracy and bring back the EU to original version. I think about something like free trade and free travel zone. You could also claim that I want to destroy Poland because I oppose to appetite of central government as well.
The original EU is not a free trade and free travel zone. It's free trade but ONLY in the coal sector and visa requirement. Well, you have a right to have any kind of Europe you want to see.
You could also claim that I want to destroy Poland because I oppose to appetite of central government as well.
Well, if I'd see Polish flag with swastika on your avatar, or the white eagle and communist symbols on his chest, the last thing I would say is that you're friend of Poland.. Don't be surprised that people seeing you embarrassing European symbols see the man who hates.
Lisbon Treaty itself wont do that but general tendencies, I mean vocal support for abortion among eurocrats and extension of EU competences, lead me to conclusion that this might be just one treaty or regulation away.
I'm always wondering, how people can oppose something they don't know.
The Lisbon Treaty clearly says that matters such as same-sex marriages or abortion can be regulated ONLY by national governments, not Brussels..
It is not army but definitely move in this direction.
The Treaty foresees that member states can make available civilian and military resources to the Union for the implementation of its Common Security and Defence operations.
Another "but what if.." kind of argument.Common Security and Defence
term in Lisbon Treaty means a catastrophe caused by nature or human. Example:
- help after earthquakes, floods etc (those are catastrophes caused by nature)
- nuclear power plant breakdown, mass scale natural contamination (those are caused by a human)
I believe military aggression from outside can be also attached to "catastrophes caused by human" folder, but I it will ever happen.
The number of Commissioners will be reduced from 27 to 18, so you can expect that the smallest states wont be awarded. In case of Ireland this is very possible. You would be really optimistic to think that such small states manage to have commissioner permanently.
Personally I don't care whether Poland have its own commissioner. I would even find this very funny if Poland would not be let to chose one commissioner.
First of all, what difference does it make where the commissioners come from? They don't work for their governments, they don't work for interest of their country, but they work for Europe. It doesn't mean that if some Pole would become agricultural commissioner then Polish farmers would achieve more money than others.. They just do their job there.
In the Irish case, yes they would lose the commissioner after Lisbon Treaty (not for forever tho), but without Lisbon Treaty they would lose commissioner even quicker.
In my private opinion the whole commissioner system is sick. I believe that every party should nominate their own commissioners and after that run in the elections to let the people decide. National governments should have no interest in that.
- They claim that Lisbon Treaty will make the EU stronger and able to compete with other empires (China, the US, Russia). While inside of the treaty we can find totally socialist Charter of Fundamental Rights.
What is so socialistic there? The chapter about my rights to vote or my freedom of religion? Can you explain that for me?
- They say that they oppose death penalty but Treaty of Lisbon re-establish death penalty in case of "war, riots, upheaval". This is pretty scary!
Let me ask you something.. Let's say there is a war and your country is occupied by some evil forces, those forces commit a muss murder on civilians everyday. But there is one brave citizen who shot and killed the commander of those forces with his rifle. According to today's law that citizen would be put in jail for lifetime.
Of course it shouldn't be allowed during the peace-time, but war is different story.
- They say that Treaty of Lisbon is shortened version of rejected constitution. In fact, it is even longer and much more complicated.
It's almost the same as the Constitution, but almost means a big difference here.
After the constitution has been rejected, EU funded a poll to ask people why they voted NO. Poll showed, that beyond completely dumb arguments, like "because I don't like my government" or "because my president sent our troops to Iraq", there were real arguments against the Constitution, such as the one that showed that many people disagreed to have an official European anthem, or make the EU flag as important as the national one, and also few other arguments.
All of those were removed form constitution + they added Chapter of Fundamental Rights which already has been ratified by many countries and called it The Lisbon Treaty. Pretty fair in my opinion.