The E.U. in 2010 and beyond

A month’s scrutiny of the E.U. and its politics has touched on several different areas and, worryingly, problems with the institution. However a contradiction has emerged in the arguments seen on Gaps in the Dialogue that should be addressed. That is, if we can find so many faults with the E.U. why do British politicians and the contributions on this site call for widening integration? Why should Turkey, the Ukraine, or possibly Russia be brought into an institution that, many argue, is flawed?

 

What to do with the black hole of EU politics

The EU decides on regulation that affects all citizens and it also has the power to be a force on the world stage. The complete lack of attention paid to what goes on in Brussels is a result of convenience on the part of our national politicians, and timidity and a failure of communication on the part of our media and civil society.

 

The EU should expand its size but reduce its remit

I want to talk about something brought up in Louis’ article last week that while he recognises he fails to draw out – the contradiction between Europe and devolution.

 

Bring on Lisbon, the EU…. and Kiev

The topic of European Integration is often approached tentatively in this country to say the least. A gap in the EU dialogue is the case for full EU integration and for Britain to relinquish more power to the EU as its primary governing body. In this article, I try to make a case for that and argue that this should be done without seeking consent from the British public

 

Serving the community

The think tank Demos raises the idea of a National Civic Service in a publication released last week. Increasing civic engagement amongst young people would benefit their local community and raise their employability skills. But, such a scheme must not be financed by student loan repayments, and should provide no alternative to paid employment.

 

Its only our first month but it may all be pointless…

So we have come to the end of our first Gaps in the Dialogue theme of the month. We were of course discussing the Environment and each of the contributors has looked at a different aspect of the issue.

 

Micro-action may serve climate change dialogue better than macro-debate

Unfortunately politics, and maybe Gaps in the Dialogue, has, perhaps, fallen into the same trap we all attempt to avoid – long, worn-out sentences calling for action. It is indicative of the green agenda and of climate change dialogue that it is easier to talk than to actually find a way through the morass that is international politics and the environmental debate.

 

Gordon Brown and the limits of law

After the Queen’s speech the government has been accused of legislating on things it can’t legislate on and not legislating on things it should have. This debate all seems to be missing something – the limits of law.

 

The Environment: A Wicked Issue

It is clear that the human consumption of fossil fuesl and the aggressive process of industrialisation and continued technological development over the past two hundred years have had a net negative impact on our environment……We have had political targets, scientific targets, economic targets and social targets to respond to climate change, but we are yet to see a holistic approach to combating environmental change which ackonwledges its ‘wicked’ nature.

 

Playing the long game in Copenhagen

Two weeks in December will not solve the problem of climate change, and only a new focus on mobilising popular pressure for mitigation will bring the solutions required. Only when public engagement on the issue is stronger will diplomats feel an overriding need to sign a deal, abandoning some incremental nationalist advantage in order to deliver the long-term gain for present and future generations.