Skip to main content

Project Creep and the European Union

Project Creep is a logical conclusion of the Dustbin Theory of Decision-making.

The Dustbin Theory of Decision-making (prop D. Howarth) is that most decisions are made essentially by a dustbin being passed around and everyone who it passes chucking something in. That means that most decisions are dominated by the people who are passed by the bin.

This is one of the flaws of politics. It also results in Project Creep. Project Creep means that if the people involved in the project also dominate in defining the boundaries of the project then it will expand gradually to get larger and larger.

This is the big problem in relating to the European Union. Unless the project is held back through constitutional mechanisms them power will gradually be centralised.

That is why I am really "not sure" about the European Treaty. I am sure that I would wish to have a referendum on the issue. However, I am uncomfortable with anything that makes project creep easier. If anyone really thinks the politicians control the EU they need to have a look at the balance between the decisions made by officers and the decisions made by politicians. The dustin of decisionmaking is normally kept in the officers' office. Only a few politicians get a chance of chucking anything in. Hence officers dominate most decisions.

I am not happy with the micromanagement of some of the european directives that specify (for example) that we must not include in recycling targets any residue following incineration. There is an ideological row about incineration. At the end of the day we need a sustainable society. That will involve some incineratoin. Even traditional hunter gatherer villages have fires. For the EU to take an ideological position that douses the fire is irrational.

Comments

Tristan said…
This is the problem with the EU (and Westminster).

Its something that us LibDems really must articulate. It is possible to be pro-EU and be against the way it functions and some of what it does.

Rather than keeping quiet and allowing ourselves to be painted as craven slaves of Brussels, we really should be criticising the EU, pointing out its failings and what should be done and highlighting what it does well.

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.