Theory of Jurisprudence on the European Model

If you put "good" in, then you will get "good" out.
If you put "bad" in, then you will get "good" out.

This is because the dice is loaded against you, as every citizen or Member State would have to reason the same for a bad idea to be given credence.

Europe protects "all creatures great and small".

I liken Europe (which is a concept not a place) to a spaceship. You put ideas in and it puts them out again as Regulations, Directives, Decisions and Recommendations.

A Regulation has "immediate" impact in the whole of the 25 member states.

A Directive has a "harmonisation" impact with existing legislation, however, member states can abstain from participating.

A Decision has "immediate" impact on an individual citizen, corporate body, group of citizens or Member State(s).

A Recommendation has no legal effect and is for purposes of a persuasive measure and guidance.

The Subsidiarity Principle enables issues to be taken out of the control of a Member State and into the control of the Community. It is anticipated that there is a higher intellect available when this principle is applied, purposive to "good".

However, Europe should be on guard to ideas which have the appearance of being "good" which do the opposite in effect. A camoflage/invasion issue.

Should "Member States" really be "Member Countries"?

Discuss.