This comment has been deleted by xth

So I'll just paste in my comment

The President of the European Council has no executive powers. All he does is call and chair meetings of the council representing the member states.

So, since his job is to represent the interests of the member states, it doesn't seem that unreasonable to me that he's selected by the (democratically elected) leaders of the member states. If he was independently elected in an EU-wide poll, he'd have a different allegiance altogether.

Basically there's a heads-we-win-tails-you-lose talking point game amongst the Europhobes. First they complained the European Commission and European Parliament were getting too powerful compared to the member states. In response, the EU strengthened the role of the European Council which represents the member states. So now the Europhobes have turned round and complained "OMG he's selected by the member states not directly elected it's undemocratic..."

I thought Skeptic's comment was pretty useful too.

a) The Council is made up of the national governments, whereas senators are directly elected. But this highlights the fact that the EU is not a federal state like the US: the national governments remain sovereign and they certainly aren't going to give up the reins of the whole contraption. For those who are against further integration, to use this "democratic deficit" as a talking point is supremely disingeneous (as is putting much emphasis on the fact that much Council work is behind closed doors: do you seriously think that there's no backroom dealing going on in the US Senate, or any other legislative chamber for that matter? Boy, do I have a bridge to sell you.) Still, even in some federal countries there is a similar setup: in Germany, the heads of the regional governments sit themselves in the "Bundesrat".

b) There is no election for president of the Commission. But then, the POTUS actually isn't directly elected either (remember 2000?). As in many European countries, the cabinet/Commission is voted on (as a block) by the Council and the Parliament. Brits make a lot of noise about the fact that the Commissioners are "unelected", because in Britain only members of parliament may sit in the cabinet. But this a very peculiar British quirk (indeed, in some countries like Holland MPs actually have to leave their seats if they want to enter the cabinet). And furthermore, as the examples of Lord Mandelson and Baroness Ashton herself show, the rule can be easily circumvented by the PM by handing out a life peerage to someone that he badly wants to get in the Cabinet (which highlights the fact that Brits, with their unelected House of Lords as part of their parliament, are in a bad position to complain about any "democratic deficit" in the EU).

--
It is unlikely that the good of a snail should reside in its shell: so is it likely that the good of a man should?

They made the decision to appoint this bloke, thus doing the job for which you elected them in the first place.

Why can't you be satisfied with that? Do you want a US style system where you vote for everyone including the dogcatcher too?

Welcome our chocolaty overlord.

--- Thad ---
Almost as Smart As you.

For she has a Dalek.

Can't be all bad then...

Needs more quality trolling, less dead horse beating.

Who's Baroness Ashton?

--
Vive le Montréal libre.

However, I fail to see the relevance of Belgian domestic politics to what the EU does. Belgium is, as the author states, three ethnic groups forced to cohabitate (he conveniently forgets about the Germans in the Eastern part). The EU is an agglomeration of twenty-something nations (less Belgium) that has joined the EU voluntarily.
--
Deyr fé, deyja frændr, deyr sjalfr it sama,
ek veit einn, at aldrei deyr: dómr um dau∂an hvern.