a common democratic mandate. I seem to remember that it was arguments from the UK which largely prevented the European Parliament from being elected by the people. Shame on you, UK! I think for those who object to the EU on the grounds of democratic deficit, they should look carefully at the previous actions of UK governments before criticising. The current structure and distribution of power represents a compromise. Any demos, jbt, at whatever level, represents some compromises. It may well be that there are certain decisions appropriate to national or local governments which currently are taken at EU level, but it is equally true that there are important international decisions taken at lower levels, which all should have an input into. The above is meant to serve as context, but unless we intend to retreat into smaller compartments (pulling up the duvet and hiding from the nasty outside world) we had better cooperate with the effective development of supranational democracy. The alternatives look infinitely worse, in our dangerous shared world. ""But integration requires participation, and those critics who advocate a less active role are sabotaging our chances of further success." I am sympathetic to this argument, but for a nation that does nant to cease to be a sovereign entity it is the only way to act in an EU that is 100% absorbed with consensus politics towards ever-closer-union. I do not wish to stand between those states, which must consider themselves as only optionally nations, from integrating as