If one has a democratic parliament the rules and laws are made and everyone has to keep to them. Under an EU leadership the rules and laws are made and everyone has to keep to them. Is there any difference?

Did anyone see the BBC programme last night? Paxman went to Brussels and asked some hard questions, and it seems much of the news coming out of Brussels was untrue (Bent bananas etc). Paxman was not sympathetic at all, and did show there are of course big differences between London & Brussels.
http://www.radiotimes.com/tv-program...eally-rules-us

The main difference is that after 5 years the democratic parliament is dissolved and the newly elected need to start again. Meanwhile after 5 years the EU keeps the professional leadership and they continue to develop the common EU policies. Personally I prefer continuous development rather than changing every 5 years.

I see the main problem is in the design of European management. The EU must find common ground for all countries with quite different cultures and climates, whereas tiny Britain doesn't have any problems with water supplies or growing olives, the southern countries do. Apparently Britain gets directives on olive growing, but these are just filed away ....