Working in harmony with European laws

MARY Rolls informs me that I live in a European superstate, currently lacking only a president (Letters, 5 November).

This comes as something of a surprise. Europe imposes no taxes on me and does not tell my country's soldiers where to fight, or its diplomats what to say. Of course, I have to abide by European regulations in areas like trade and working practices: but then so do my friends in Norway, who pay royally for the privilege of obeying the rules, but have no influence in making them. When I cross the North Sea, I still need to change my pounds into euros. Some superstate.

And Europe has had a "president" since 1958. The head of government of the country holding the rotating six-month presidency of the European Union Council automatically assumes the role of president of the council – with the obvious disadvantage that as soon as he or she has been able to make any progress in negotiations, it's time to move on.

It makes more sense to introduce continuity: but it is most unlikely that the presidents and prime ministers who make up the European Council will delegate any more power to the new president than they have given to his or her predecessors.

I strongly support European unity. But unity of purpose and action in pursuit of shared values can be achieved by an organisation of like-minded states, working in harmony. There is no need for an over-arching "superstate".

JOHN BRAND
European Movement in Scotland
Cumberland Street SE Lane Edinburgh

Robert Henderson's assertion (Letters, 6 November) that the EU is legally superior to British law is ominous. The question arises whether it is superior to Scots law, and whether the Declaration of Arbroath is now morally invalid?

I do not recall having been given an opportunity to vote, either as Scot or a resident in the UK, for entry into the EU. There is no democratic foundation for the automatic incorporation of EU directives into the body of Scots law.

Unfortunately, the EU now has a powerful vested interest in its own survival and growth and there now seems no prospect that it will ever evolve into a democratic institution.

Perhaps it is not surprising that some member states ignore these directives when they are harmful to the interests of the communities they represent. As Scotland is not a member state, this option is not open to us.

(DR) DAVID PURVES
Strathalmond Road
Edinburgh