Reader Response Wednesday

Since this Blog started I've recieved a lot questions from readers. I've been doing my best to answer them either on facebook, private message or email but I had a thought that maybe people might like to see some of these answers. So without further comment I present Reader Response Wednesday where I'll pick 2/3 of the best questions and give them some public answers!

If you would like to submit a question feel free to do so on facebook (as many of you already have) or on our letstalktory@gmail.com email address which has seen several dozen questions (a day) since I put it up on the site a few weeks ago.

Now that's all out of the way.

Our first question comes from Thomas. He is 15 and asks:

"What sort of experiences do you have in the party and do you have any advice for me if I want to get ahead?"

Well Thomas during this years General Election I served as a Campaign Manager for the Sunderland Central Campaign, I was also a Council Candidate myself for the Ryhope Ward in Sunderland and I've done several internships in Parliament with Conservative MPs. I do a lot of voluntary work for local associations and I attend events hosted by groups like CWF and the Conservative for Liberty.

The best advice I can give you in terms of getting ahead is just to get involved with everything and never be afraid to tell someone your ideas. It's why I was asked to be a Campaign Manager.

The next question comes from Stephen, he sent me the following email last night:

"Hi Harry. Really like the Blog. Have you done Political Compass? If so where do you come out?"

Why yes Stephen I have done political compass and I come out right in the liberatarian centre-right. I normally get values around about:

Economic Left/Right: 2.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.2

(sorry I can't figure out how to grab the image)

Today's final question comes from James and is all about the guest blog by my friend John Hill. James sent me the following question:

"Hi there just read the article by Jonathan Hill. Was just wondering if he had any thoughts on how the EU could reform the Common Security Policy to make it more effective in the face of a crisis like Syria in the future?"

I've spoken to John and he kindly agreed to prepare an answer. So James, here it is:

"Thanks for your question. 

The current framework is simply to have a meeting of foreign ministers or heads of government through the European Council. Even so, FP meetings are chaired by the EU's high representative. Even so, the HR has a lot of input in meetings AND makes public statements that are personal and alleged European-positions.

Council meetings should be chaired by a rotating presidency, and the High Representative should be removed or reformed into the same manner of the UN Secretariat. The office of the High Representative should have merely a managerial role, and after the member states agree to any possible position, the member states themselves should direct the HR to take certain actions. 

Most of the time, they merely agree to common positions and then leave it at that. The HR should serve as the arm of the Council of Foreign Ministers, not as a separate office - again like the UN Secretariat. In theory, CFSP meetings are structured similarly to meetings of NATO's governing body, the NATO Council. In practice, it isn't. In practice, the NATO Council makes joint actual plans of defence and action, and then directs the Secretary General to take appropriate action, to conduct further studies, or to make statements on their behalf. If you look at the common or joint positions on Syria that arose from the EU, they are just theoretical and have no pratical impact. 

The CFSP should be a set body outside of the European Council similar to how TREVI meetings happened (although, today they should not be ad-hoc and should be perpetual). From there, the permanent representatives of each nation to the EU should partake in that body, or a Permanent Security Representative should be appointed from each party to the new body. Actual resolutions should be developed, not joint "positions". 

Resolutions, with action and direction and legal enforcability similar to UNSC resolutions would change the body from one where there is nothing concrete happening, which allows the European leaders (High Representative, President, etc.) to make their own positions clear, to one where the EU has a clear direction and the EU member states themselves direct the European machine in one way.  

Of course, this would likely require treaty/constitutional changes which would be largely rather difficult to achieve unless there is a strong willingness from the member states. This would mean that the HR and President of the Commission would need to anger not just Britain, but ALSO France and Germany. From there, such change could be pushed forward by British reformists."

Well this wraps up today's reader responses. I'll keep responding privately as well (and if you ever want your question to remain private just tell me). Thank you to everyone who has taken the time to write in so far and I hope to see more questions tonight when I check my inbox.