Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx
Is our system better though, and how?The big difference I see between the EU parliament and our own is the lack of party politics in the EU parliament. This is both a good thing and a bad thing. It's good in some ways as there isn't a whip. That said, there are of course loose groups in the Parliament such as the ECR and EPP but they don't have the power of parties in the UK Parliament.
The bad side as I see it is that you can tend to end up with consensus politics rather than having a single party government driving decisions through. Of course, single party governments are not truly representative either, ask the Scottish what they think of the Westminster government and whether it really represents their interests.
I don't think the way the systems work can really point to one systems being better than the other, they are just on a spectrum of parliamentary systems. Swings and roundabouts I guess...
Sorry, stream of consciousness on my lunch break 
|
It doesn't matter. What matters is that it's our system, made by people we elect and can fire if we choose. The fact that it's not perfect doesn't alter that. Changing anything about the EU is undeniably far harder for various reasons, including ones of national interest. Our system has time and time again forced change whether that be to unpopular policies (e.g. academy schools very recently) or indeed unpopular party leaders and governments. So if we're comparing systems I'd argue ours is far from perfect but it's rather better than the EU alternative in which we'll be increasingly told what to do by people who certainly don't have our interests as much at heart as we do.