Tweet
EU is an absolute anti democratic bureaucracy
I study the right in the Community, so here are some facts :
Decisions are taken by 3 actors : the Commission, the Council, the Parliament.
The Commission has ~ 20 Comissioners, who are decided by the states. Big states have 2 commissioners, while small states have 1. These commissioners are not elected by the people, but chosen by the PMs or Presidents. These commissioners have a bureaucracy behind them : advisors, administrators etc. The commission must represent the interests of the Union, not of a particular member.
The Council represents the national governments. In a Council meeting, the states can be represented by ministers (when the question is important), but at most by administrators who represent the interest of their State. They decide most often at "qualified majority" (each country has more or less votes than others, to imperfectly reflect demography). When a minister votes on behalf of his country, it's considered the entire country is coherent and votes unanimously like the adminstrator did. Again, the Council is not elected.
The Parliament is the only democratic instance of the EU. Its members are elected for 5 years. Every country holds the elections the same day, even if the functionment of the election can vary from one country to another. Number of representatives per country reflects almost perfetly the demographics. The parliament can vote defiance towards the Commission, and it has almost been done once (the former, corrupt, Comission resigned before this).
Now, how are the decisions taken ?
The Commission elaborates a law (with an extreme pressure from the lobbies). Only it can elaborate and propose a law. Commissioners -or their representatives for that matter- have to vote if their work is worthy or not. If they agree, the project is transferred to the Council.
The Council discusses the articles presented in the law. After much bargaining, an agreement may be found between the bureaucrats, and the articles get voted one by one. When an article is voted, it cannot be cancelled. When bureaucrats cannot find an agreement among them, true politicians have to decide. When the law is approved by the Council, it then goes to the Parliament, in some cases only.
The parliament studies the law, and votes amendments if necessary. If the representatives agree on some amendments, it is then transferred to the Council, and a bargaining between the Parliament and the council begins, with the moderation of a specialized institution. In most cases, the moderation is a success and the law is a bit amended. If the moderation is an utter failure, the law fails to pass.
This procedure is very long : it can take less than 6 months if it's about something unimportant (the max. height of garden dwarves for example), but it can last up to 8 years for very difficult and political subjects, such as the opening of national monopoles.
What we can see is that the only Democratic institution has almost nothing to do : it has no initiative of elaborating a law, it can slightly modify an existing project, it must wait for the COmmission and the Council to do something before it can do anything by itself. National parliaments are often simply ignored, and they often know what's going on too late, when agreements between governments have been reached. The lobbies have an important role, esp. those with much money, because they can influence directly the work of the Comission (which will influence dearly the rest of the law).
The powers of the parliament slowly progress as time passes by, but it is still unsignificant. It come from the philosophy of the EU : after WW2 and the failed attempts to unite Europe between the 2 world wars, it was decided to create economic bounds first, and political bounds after, when the solidarities were concrete and true.
Edit : by the way, as Propotkin said it, you'd need a Phd in political sciences... I almost have this
I study the right in the Community, so here are some facts :
Decisions are taken by 3 actors : the Commission, the Council, the Parliament.
The Commission has ~ 20 Comissioners, who are decided by the states. Big states have 2 commissioners, while small states have 1. These commissioners are not elected by the people, but chosen by the PMs or Presidents. These commissioners have a bureaucracy behind them : advisors, administrators etc. The commission must represent the interests of the Union, not of a particular member.
The Council represents the national governments. In a Council meeting, the states can be represented by ministers (when the question is important), but at most by administrators who represent the interest of their State. They decide most often at "qualified majority" (each country has more or less votes than others, to imperfectly reflect demography). When a minister votes on behalf of his country, it's considered the entire country is coherent and votes unanimously like the adminstrator did. Again, the Council is not elected.
The Parliament is the only democratic instance of the EU. Its members are elected for 5 years. Every country holds the elections the same day, even if the functionment of the election can vary from one country to another. Number of representatives per country reflects almost perfetly the demographics. The parliament can vote defiance towards the Commission, and it has almost been done once (the former, corrupt, Comission resigned before this).
Now, how are the decisions taken ?
The Commission elaborates a law (with an extreme pressure from the lobbies). Only it can elaborate and propose a law. Commissioners -or their representatives for that matter- have to vote if their work is worthy or not. If they agree, the project is transferred to the Council.
The Council discusses the articles presented in the law. After much bargaining, an agreement may be found between the bureaucrats, and the articles get voted one by one. When an article is voted, it cannot be cancelled. When bureaucrats cannot find an agreement among them, true politicians have to decide. When the law is approved by the Council, it then goes to the Parliament, in some cases only.
The parliament studies the law, and votes amendments if necessary. If the representatives agree on some amendments, it is then transferred to the Council, and a bargaining between the Parliament and the council begins, with the moderation of a specialized institution. In most cases, the moderation is a success and the law is a bit amended. If the moderation is an utter failure, the law fails to pass.
This procedure is very long : it can take less than 6 months if it's about something unimportant (the max. height of garden dwarves for example), but it can last up to 8 years for very difficult and political subjects, such as the opening of national monopoles.
What we can see is that the only Democratic institution has almost nothing to do : it has no initiative of elaborating a law, it can slightly modify an existing project, it must wait for the COmmission and the Council to do something before it can do anything by itself. National parliaments are often simply ignored, and they often know what's going on too late, when agreements between governments have been reached. The lobbies have an important role, esp. those with much money, because they can influence directly the work of the Comission (which will influence dearly the rest of the law).
The powers of the parliament slowly progress as time passes by, but it is still unsignificant. It come from the philosophy of the EU : after WW2 and the failed attempts to unite Europe between the 2 world wars, it was decided to create economic bounds first, and political bounds after, when the solidarities were concrete and true.
Edit : by the way, as Propotkin said it, you'd need a Phd in political sciences... I almost have this
And I want more Euros everyday 
.
Comment