On voices, mouths and national and EU "interest"

There is a lot of discussion re the issue of representation of the EU with either a "singe voice" vs (latest idea introduced)"single mouth" (eg in the G20).

IME what is key is for single EU voice and/or mouth to reflect a position that's representative of all 27 or decision reached by 27.

Is having a single mouth boring? No, IME that is not the case with European PMs and Presidents (eg Sarkozy) or Obama when they speak re national interest

Thus IMO the challenge is to define "EU interest" in an inclusive way for all "parts" of the EU, in the same way that eg Angela's voice is inclusive of all 16 laender & Obama's of all 50 states & Brown's of England, Scotland, Wales and NI.

On economic and political governance

Re all the economic governance "fashion" of recent months and weeks:

All policy issues have an economic dimension but no policy even econ has only an econ dimension 25 minutes ago via we

IMO economic policy decisions cannot be left to the "market" or supply and demand, they should not replace elected political governance.

For a market to be truly free it must also be "democratic" and rule of law does not mean rule of market rules or #economic theories.

Even common markets and free trade areas need political governance, IMO. Hence EEC Common Market naturally led towards EU Political Union.

IMO, we see the same thing happening with world free trade, ie for political governance to balance multilateral economic activity.

IMO all policy decisions must be approved by the people or their elected reps and economic, monetary and fiscal policies are no exception.