Should there be an EU president?

European Union citizens could be given the chance to vote for an EU president under new proposals being considered.

The idea was proposed during talks in Brussels to try to draft a controversial EU constitution.

But many British representatives would prefer an appointment to be decided by national governments.

What do you think? Should there be an elected EU president? Who should he or she be elected by - EU citizens or national governments? Who would you vote for?

Thank you for your e-mails. This debate is now closed. A selection of your comments is published below.

---

The following comments reflect the balance of views we have received:

A president? The EU can barely deal with its bloated and hugely expensive infrastructure, gross subsidies, fear of Turkey becoming a member and general dislike for the East; atop this, sclerotic politics and delusional posturing as a great power, make for its certain collapse. And naturally the cause of its forthcoming collapse is: greed. Collapsed corrupt societies fill volumes; the EU is no different.
Drigelio, Madrid Spain

If the EU wants to assume any political relevance, there must be a democratically elected President. The current situation is plainly ridiculous: you can be for EU or against it, not in the middle of the road. It doesn't work.
Francesco Mordeglia, Milano (Italy)

A president appointed by governments would just be a puppet. However, one elected by the people, even if he/she had limited powers, would give Europe real clout on the world stage. And when it came to taking on the USA, they could point out to George W. Bush that at least one of them was elected.
Ceri Vines, Worcester

The EU started out to be a trading community, not a federated nation. It was never intended to subsume nations' sovereign rights. Let's get back to that and it might restore some credibility to the thing.
Barry, London England

No one likes to be ruled by some distant bureaucrat Ben Sutton, Wales

If Tony Blair's plans for more centralised power within the EU go ahead, there will be no point in devolution for Wales or an independent Scotland. They would become independent but end up with less control over national policies than they did before. An EU constitution and president followed by a super state, would result in increase conflict between European states. No one likes to be ruled by some distant bureaucrat. This has been proved by the unification of the British Isles. An EU super state would, in-time, trigger separatist movements, terrorism, and possibly worse.
Ben Sutton, Wales

I believe in unity amongst people in Europe and the rest of the world. I think the unification of Europe would be positive for everyone, but there's a lot of flag waving, partisan Brits out there who without any knowledge of their country, born into flag waving nationalism, sing God Save the Queen and are anti-European. I think it boils down to one ultimate choice in the future of the world, European nation or subordinate state of the American empire. I'd rather have a European president than America ruling us.
Daniel, Newcastle, UK

How disingenuous of Daniel, Newcastle and others to write off opposition to European integration as 'Flag waving, partisan Brits'. Increased EU integration is a question of economic, political and legal self determination - e.g. do we actually want to have a say in our own futures, or do we feel comfortable with the concept of an unelected beurocracy governing in our interest? Many feel that is unacceptable, and based on the past history of the EU with regards to Britains national interest (farming policy, fishing policy, illegal economic blockades by the French government and or farmers, attempts to end the UKs rebate, ignoring the UK veto etc etc), their opposition is understandable. The continual sniping and of those who wish to join the EU, in an attempt to force through their opinions, does them no favours in public debates.
David McQuiggin, England

It would not be a good idea because if you elect a president without giving him the means of leading a common European policy, his task would only be to choose the flower colours during ceremonies.
Eric, France

There should be no EU president. The EU is no more a national entity than is the UN, Nato or any other multi-national organisation. The political integration of the EU has a long, long way to go before anything like a central government ought to be considered.
Gary Ross, Oberursel, Germany

A president would contribute to a freer flow of political ideas throughout the continent Miroslav, New York, USA

I think it's a very good idea. An elected president would strengthen the idea of one Europe and contribute to a freer flow of political ideas throughout the continent. There will be much more respect for an elected official than for someone appointed by a national government. It would be very interesting to see how if national electorates cast their votes by nation of origin, or by the ideas one is supporting.
Miroslav, New York, USA

The EU is already too centralised, too bureaucratic and too ideological. Any attempt at further centralisation should be resisted. An elected president will inevitably become the centre of a new power base which is likely to exacerbate the faults of the EU.
Faustino, Brisbane, Australia (ex-UK)

Careful, look what presidential elections did for us.
CC, USA

Its members need to learn to compromise with one another and build consensus Paul, California, US

The EU shouldn't be filled with divisive politics, but it also shouldn't mean imposing the views of a few larger countries upon the rest of Europe (something France and Germany should learn quickly in an expanded Europe). If the EU wants anything more than a symbolic head of state, its members need to learn to compromise with one another and build consensus.
Paul, California, USA

Europe is still divided on several important world political issues. How can then EU be represented by one unanimous president? If the EU does elect a president I think the world could be on the verge of another Cold War.
Muhammad Khalid Qureshi, Karachi, Pakistan.

The EU doesn't need a president. What Europe needs is fewer politicians. It costs the taxpayer two euros per person per year to maintain the multilingual process in the EU government; wouldn't the public be better served if this cash was used in a more productive manner? What a waste of taxpayers' money.
Joaquim Dias, Netherlands

Our strength will come through unification. I believe that an EU president will give Europe a powerful voice and stance in the world. This does not mean we must forget about our different cultures and languages, instead we should celebrate them by letting the EU citizens vote for the president. Through our differences we can gain knowledge and strength, not weakness and indecisiveness! Are morals and ideals different when expressed in another language? What do the Netherlands and France have in common? I don't know, but I'm willing to find out...
Tamara, France

I don't understand why any country would want to give up its sovereignty Jason Vaccaro, Amesbury, USA

An EU president? I think it's a crazy idea. I don't understand why any country would want to give up its sovereignty, especially if the president is elected not by the people, but by governments. It's also obvious that the whole "Unified Europe" idea is based solely on competing or "squashing" the US. Something that Europeans might regret. We're supposed to be allies not enemies.
Jason Vaccaro, Amesbury, US

There should be an EU president elected by EU citizens. Unless the EU advances towards political unity as well as economic unity, based on elections, citizen will have less and less control over the legislation and the regulations that affect their daily lives.
Isabelle Runkle, Majadhonda, Spain

Do you want the Europeans to actively be interested in European politics? If yes, then there should be an EU president elected by the EU citizens. This may be a real chance to get Europeans more interested in European politics.
Imdat Solak, Munich, Germany

More red tape and another useless job created to give some politician yet another handout. If it's has to exist them the EU should comprise the elected officials of each country operating as a committee. No one person should ever be in charge of anything like this.
Keith, Sunderland, UK

A president of the EU directly elected by the people, will be able to largely contain the big differences that exist today between the member states. This will be possible however only if the member states transfer to him or her, a large part of their sovereignty. The question thus is if Europeans have so many things in common, so as to share their future with the others.
D. Kefalakos, Athens, Greece

I think EU president is an excellent idea. It's the means of getting one that seems dubious. It should be an elected official, not appointed. People with power should be directly responsible to the people they represent.
G. C. Jordahl, Minnesota, USA

It's the only way Europe will become a greater power Chris Barton, UK

Europe needs a clear leader, elected by the EU counties. It is the only way Europe will become a greater power and stop the arrogant American dominance of the rest of the world.
Chris Barton, UK

Sure, but the EU president, to truly represents his constituents, would have to speak all 15 official languages. Impossible? Then there shouldn't be an EU president. The EU doesn't have a common voice, just a common economic trade area. No, there cannot be an EU president with so many different voices.
Shauna, England

The presidency of the European council and of the Commission should be merged into one and the holder of the office should be elected either directly or, preferably, by the European parliament. This will render the Union more democratic and transparent. It is ironic that Eurosceptics, while claiming that the EU is not democratic and transparent enough are the most ardent opponents of a directly elected president of Europe.
Joseph, Gozo, Malta

Under no circumstance should there be a president of the EU. While we're on the subject we need to sort out the unelected EU commissioners. What a corrupt institution the EU is - only the commissioners may propose legislation and we don't have the ability to turn them out of office and absent MEPs are deemed to vote in favour of anything the commissioners propose. Democracy my elbow!
Richard Buxton, Reading UK

There should be an elected president but only if that person is also president of the European Commission. I do not see the need to split these roles. But I think the legitimacy that an elected president would have would be a direct challenge to the authority of national leaders and that's why they won't let it happen and so instead we will get a president that is appointed.
Graham, London, England

What on earth is a EU president for? I still don't know what the European MPs are for (the Kinnocks and the like), so what's the point of a president as well? I mean, there's nothing for them to do!
George Heal, Brighton, UK

It's about time we set aside our differences and start to work together Matteo, Milan, Italy

It is about time we set aside our differences and start to work together when the choice is between cooperation and disappearance from the world stage: a EU president elected directly by the people would not only be a first good step to start to address the democratic deficit affecting the Union but also a way to make the Union more effective on the international scene.
Matteo, Milan, Italy

If as the Europhiles keep insisting, the EU will not become a single state or a United States of Europe, why does it need a president?
Edwin Thornber, UK / Romania

Yes, there should be an elected EU president. Not only a president, but the whole commission should be elected directly by the citizens of the EU or indirectly by the parliament. What the EU really needs is transparency to the people. If the people are directly able to influence the policy of the EU, an EU government has to make sure to inform the people about what they are actually doing or risk to be voted out in the next election.
Stephan, Germany

Not only do we not need a president but we don't need an EU either! The whole thing has been dreamt up by politicians and bureaucrats for their own ends, without any consent from the British people. Free trade areas yes - political unions no, and if they ratify this new nonsense without a referendum there could well be civil disorder.
Malcolm, UK

Whether an elected EU president is a good idea very much depends on the terms. In general, we need more and better EU integration, as every day shows. People do not have to share my view on the wider EU philosophy, but why do we still hear this rubbish about custom union? This was not even the sole intention of the founding fathers, as evidenced in article 1 of the preamble to the treaty of Rome. It's high time for an educational programme in this respect in the UK. On the continent we learn this at school.
Ronald Vopel, Brussels, Belgium

Absolutely! The EU needs a president to avoid the recent divisiveness. An EU president speaking for the EU could have totally isolated the US and prevented any action. The British and East Euros would not have had the choice of supporting the aggression. An EU president is a must to end America's dynasty.
Francois, Paris

Give the EU a figurehead it needs Will, Brussels

The question of an elected president is central to making the EU work better. As many people complain that the EU is distant and unaccountable, someone (and it probably won't be Blair) who has a popular mandate and clear powers could help give the EU a figurehead it needs, and crucially make it more real and more democratic.
Will, Brussels

The UK already has two presidents - one in 10 Downing Street and his master in the White House.
Jon E, France

The EU isn't just about customs and economic growth - despite the half-truths of successive British governments, the European project has been about federalism from the start. If a presidential position is to be created, it should be directly elected, but if a true federation with distributed power is the goal then the priority should be to invigorate political involvement at a more local level.
Neil Gall, Edinburgh, Scotland

Neil Gall and Ronald Vopel seem to have forgotten that when the UK citizens WERE allowed their vote on the EEC (as it then was) we were told by Ted Heath that it WAS to be only a trade and customs area, and that there was no further political intentions. Then the actual treaty documents and cabinet discussions were locked away under the 30 year rule, and finally, the treaty of Rome was NOT allowed to be published in the UK
Chris Boote, London, UK

A council chairman with limited powers would be the most logical solution Kilian, Ireland

An elected president will come one day. But it is still too early now for such a radical step. First our heads of state have to learn to cooperate better and to give up the national veto. A council chairman with limited powers would be the most logical solution at present.
Kilian, Ireland

I definitely think the EU should have more a more democratic framework, and an elected president would go a long way towards this. Why should it continue to be ruled by unelected commissioners, rather than an elected president and cabinet? A move in this direction is all the more important with the imminent expansion. I can see no good reason for refusing to allow us to elect the EU's leaders.
David Hazel, Fareham, UK

I nominate Tony Blair. He has already proved himself to be successful in the 'presidential' role.
Hugh, York, England

EU leaders are more concerned with consolidating power than with economic unions Xavier, Canada

It seems the EU is discussing the need for a president so it can become the next "superpower" so to speak. Why would Europeans want an EU president? It was my understanding that the EU would be an economic union of European nations. Not a new "country" or governing body for all European nations. Now it seems there are certain leaders within the EU that want to unify Europe in order to posture themselves as a dominant world power. I think Europeans should maintain their sovereignty as independent nations. The leaders of the EU are more concerned with consolidating power than with economic unions.
Xavier, Canada

No there shouldn't be an EU president and others already on the gravy train should be pared back or dismissed after submitting to a performance review administered by the taxpayer. All future posts in the EU should be voluntary only (meaning without pay) then we would only have politicians who had the UK at heart.
Llee, UK

Why not have a three person president? Where the tri-presidents have to vote among themselves to act as one. This way it would help in any bias voting toward a single country.
Stephen, Lansing, Michigan, USA

No to an EU president. Can't we just give up on the whole European Union idea? I've never felt less like a European. There's nothing in common between my country and, for example, France.
Fred Bonset, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Great! More politicians! Steven Wade, UK

Great! Just what we need - more politicians!
Steven Wade, UK

Initially, my response would be no. However, perhaps having a more united Europe and one clear voice could be just what the Bush administration needs to realise that there are other governments in the world who have a legitimate opposition - and can actually do something about it. Please Europe, do not elect Blair!
David F, NYC, USA

Do you honestly think the British Government would let us the people vote on the presidency of Europe? They think we are too stupid to be allowed to vote on the European Constitution changes which pass even more power to Brussels. Unlike our European counterparts that are consulted by their governments on how they would like to be governed in Europe by referendum, we poor cousins in the UK are dictated to by our leaders.
Duncan, London, UK

An elected president lends Europe too much political power Will, UK

The need for European cooperation should be recognised by the appointment of a general secretary. A president, particularly an elected president, lends Europe too much political power. Why can't we just stick to the original intention - a customs union and an ambition to promote economic growth?
Will, UK

Given that several European countries continue to be incapable of delivering a non-biased, independent vote in the Eurovision Song Contest, do we really believe that they wouldn't just vote for their "mates" in a (slightly more important) presidential election?
Rebecca, UK

Is this for real? Just when we're marketing the idea of democracy to the Iraqis, our government is campaigning for a president to be appointed by national governments themselves. We don't need a president of Europe and we certainly don't need Blair posturing for the job and the power that he so openly craves.
Phillip Holley, London, UK

This is Tony Blair's career goal Patricia, UK

Well, this is what Tony Blair has been waiting for. This is what he's been working for. This is what he deserted his duties as our PM for. This is his pension, this is his career goal. I do hope he doesn't get the job. Just as in any good business, any director whose sights are so clearly and obsessively targeted towards a future position at the expense of their current responsibilities has let the company down, and shouldn't be promoted. He won't be getting my vote.
Patricia, UK

No president should be elected unless it is democratically agreed by the British people that one is required in the first place. What is the point of electing a prime minister of the UK?
Tony, UK