3 ms·
It's a bit more complex. The EU produces a huge amount of legislation, but you only hear about the most weird/funny/outrageous one. Most things go through smoo
by pergadad 8y ago
It's a bit more complex. The EU produces a huge amount of legislation, but you only hear about the most weird/funny/outrageous one.
Most things go through smoothly because they are so technical or orln topics that no one cares. Then once in a while you have this kind which is in some ways a big progress. Look at the education provisions in there. But here's how the EU works: the Commission (civil service) proposes a draft text. The parliament debates and changes it (mostly along national and political party group lines). The council (national governments) debate and change the same.commissiom proposal. Them council and parliament beat themselves over the head (with commission mediation and proposals on how to find common ground) until they find common ground on drafting that everyone can accept.
Note, not one thing that everyone likes, but one that everyone can accept. Despite the bullshit you might read in UK media or the claims of tyrants like Orban who claim they fought (in their xitizens:against' interest, of course) other governments over this or that, it basically never happens that something is decided at EU level that one (or several) countries strongly disagree with. So you get this kind of pieces in each legislative document - with some bites for everyone and lots of things that have as their sole virtue that no one really hates them that much. Often no one even really understands each part in detail
It's similar across the world (see the literally thousands of pages a legislation like Dodd-Frank in the US context can become) - the democratic process is messy; at EU level it's additionally messy because there are 28 national interests at stake and at play.
- vsl 8y ago> it basically never happens that something is decided at EU level that one (or several) countries strongly disagree with That’s straight up delusional. Latest example I cared for: the guns restriction imposed on Czechia against its will, in an area EU has no business regulating in the first place, with repeated abuse of procedure. So egregious that Czechia sued over it. Never happens. (And as I learned from another comment here, I’m apparently a racist now for not liking this sort of abuses...) But then, your bias is pretty obvious from calling Orban a “tyrant”. You may not like his politics, he’s not much of a EU-loving leftist for sure, but come on.