4 ms·

It is not really about certain countries having more control than others. Germany has the largest population in the EU, and since MEPs apportionment is proporti

by angott 8y ago

It is not really about certain countries having more control than others. Germany has the largest population in the EU, and since MEPs apportionment is proportional to population, 99 out of 785 MEPs are German. It's a matter of demographics.

anbop 8y ago
MEPs are not directly proportional to population, but degressively so, where the smallest countries have more and the largest countries have less representation than they would on a purely proportional basis. But this is about Sweden's vote in the Council, where each country casts a vote as a country, but that vote is weighted by that country's population.
- SlowRobotAhead 8y ago
  So, if I'm understanding this right, it's in Germany and Sweden's own political interests to significantly increase their populations?
  - anbop 8y ago
    It’s in most countries’ political interests to increase their populations, if they can feed them.
  - twic 8y ago
    And then split into multiple smaller countries in order to get better vote per capita ratios. Of course, an expert conspiracy theorist will note that the more or less culturally and linguistically homogeneous group of about twenty million people living in the north of Europe are already split into a vote-buffing four countries ...
    - pmontra 8y ago
      Three countries. Norway is not part of the EU.
    - anon4242 8y ago
      > linguistically homogeneous group I beg to differ. Finnish is as far removed from Swedish and Danish as Hungarian. Italian is probably closer to either than each other. Swedish and Danish are (at least on reading level) mutually intelligible.
      - ahje 8y ago
        There are about 20 million speakers of Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic, Faroese and Swedish (including native Swedish-speakers in Finland). If we added the Finnish-speaking population to the mix we'd end up with a population of over 25 million -- not 20. That being said, I'd say Finns are quite close to the other Nordic countries culturally, even though there is a clear language barrier. For those who don't know what this is about, Finnish and Sami aren't Indo-European languages like the other Nordic languages are, while Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are closely related and somewhat mutually intelligible.
  - pergadad 8y ago
    Not really. You have one vote in the council per country. For it to be a majority you need both the number of countries >55% and the amount of population >65%. Population is defined as people with "usual residence"in the country. I can't find clarity on this right now but eg refugees would normally not be included. So it's really long term population increase which is rather rare in Europe. With 83 million people Germany has 16.18% of EU residents (18.5% post Brexit). Adding 1 million increases the weight by around ~.18% (or ~.23% post Brexit) - assuming you get people from outside the EU and thus an overall EU population increase. Thinking strategically, you could think this matters if this is a long term trend. But factually you have to have quite a lot of shifting population (within-EU migration) to change the set of possible alliances that can reach 65%. Moreover, even the smallest country retains their individual voting weight, so if one country grew so big to overshadow all others they could still reign it in through majority vote.
- w-m 8y ago
  Germany will in fact have the worst ratio of population per member of parliament after the 2019 elections, with 860k people per MEP vs Maltas 77k people per MEP, on the other end of the scale: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apportionment_in_the_European_Parliament#2019_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apportionment_in_the_European_...
  - khuey 8y ago
    Wow. That's even worse than the US Electoral College (where California has approximately 700k people per vote while Wyoming has only approximately 200k people per vote).
    - matthewmacleod 8y ago
      Worth bearing in mind, however, that this is a deliberate decision stemming from the founding of the ECSC – the goal being to make sure that votes in smaller member states have additional political power to help offset the de facto greater economic and soft power of larger states. Like all of these things, it's a bit of a fudge and it's reasonable to ask if it's the right approach – but it's not an accidental outcome.
      - anbop 8y ago
        That’s true of the Electoral College as well, but doesn’t and shouldn’t insulate it from criticism.
      - aitchnyu 8y ago
        Is there an Optimal Constituency Algorithm that one can apply to their government to ensure less populous constituencies still get represented?
    - mlindner 8y ago
      That was done intentionally to insulate the smaller/less populated states from the control of larger/more populated states.
    - 8y ago
Mirioron 8y ago
MEPs don't matter in this case. They've already voted. What matters now is how the EU Council votes. As far as I know, they need a qualified majority, meaning that 16 out of the 28 member states have to be for and 65% of the population of the union.
sonnyblarney 8y ago
It's a canard to talk about this in terms of 'representation or votes'. MEPs have very little power, and it was designed that way. Were this democratic, the underlying MEP issues would have been integrated long ago as the MEPs would have had a hand in crafting the bill. As it stands, they are a rubber stamp, or failsafe on some legislation. MEP's cannot even punt the unelected entities which make the law in the EU - a democratic deficit which is unique in the modern world. A better alternative to the A13 conundrum would be to 'start creating Googles' instead of having to legislate at them from 10K kilmoeters away.

by angott 8y ago

anbop 8y ago

MEPs are not directly proportional to population, but degressively so, where the smallest countries have more and the largest countries have less representation than they would on a purely proportional basis. But this is about Sweden's vote in the Council, where each country casts a vote as a country, but that vote is weighted by that country's population.

SlowRobotAhead 8y ago
So, if I'm understanding this right, it's in Germany and Sweden's own political interests to significantly increase their populations?
- anbop 8y ago
  It’s in most countries’ political interests to increase their populations, if they can feed them.
- twic 8y ago
  And then split into multiple smaller countries in order to get better vote per capita ratios. Of course, an expert conspiracy theorist will note that the more or less culturally and linguistically homogeneous group of about twenty million people living in the north of Europe are already split into a vote-buffing four countries ...
  - pmontra 8y ago
    Three countries. Norway is not part of the EU.
  - anon4242 8y ago
    > linguistically homogeneous group I beg to differ. Finnish is as far removed from Swedish and Danish as Hungarian. Italian is probably closer to either than each other. Swedish and Danish are (at least on reading level) mutually intelligible.
    - ahje 8y ago
      There are about 20 million speakers of Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic, Faroese and Swedish (including native Swedish-speakers in Finland). If we added the Finnish-speaking population to the mix we'd end up with a population of over 25 million -- not 20. That being said, I'd say Finns are quite close to the other Nordic countries culturally, even though there is a clear language barrier. For those who don't know what this is about, Finnish and Sami aren't Indo-European languages like the other Nordic languages are, while Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are closely related and somewhat mutually intelligible.
- pergadad 8y ago
  Not really. You have one vote in the council per country. For it to be a majority you need both the number of countries >55% and the amount of population >65%. Population is defined as people with "usual residence"in the country. I can't find clarity on this right now but eg refugees would normally not be included. So it's really long term population increase which is rather rare in Europe. With 83 million people Germany has 16.18% of EU residents (18.5% post Brexit). Adding 1 million increases the weight by around ~.18% (or ~.23% post Brexit) - assuming you get people from outside the EU and thus an overall EU population increase. Thinking strategically, you could think this matters if this is a long term trend. But factually you have to have quite a lot of shifting population (within-EU migration) to change the set of possible alliances that can reach 65%. Moreover, even the smallest country retains their individual voting weight, so if one country grew so big to overshadow all others they could still reign it in through majority vote.
w-m 8y ago
Germany will in fact have the worst ratio of population per member of parliament after the 2019 elections, with 860k people per MEP vs Maltas 77k people per MEP, on the other end of the scale: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apportionment_in_the_European_Parliament#2019_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apportionment_in_the_European_...
- khuey 8y ago
  Wow. That's even worse than the US Electoral College (where California has approximately 700k people per vote while Wyoming has only approximately 200k people per vote).
  - matthewmacleod 8y ago
    Worth bearing in mind, however, that this is a deliberate decision stemming from the founding of the ECSC – the goal being to make sure that votes in smaller member states have additional political power to help offset the de facto greater economic and soft power of larger states. Like all of these things, it's a bit of a fudge and it's reasonable to ask if it's the right approach – but it's not an accidental outcome.
    - anbop 8y ago
      That’s true of the Electoral College as well, but doesn’t and shouldn’t insulate it from criticism.
    - aitchnyu 8y ago
      Is there an Optimal Constituency Algorithm that one can apply to their government to ensure less populous constituencies still get represented?
  - mlindner 8y ago
    That was done intentionally to insulate the smaller/less populated states from the control of larger/more populated states.
  - 8y ago

Mirioron 8y ago

MEPs don't matter in this case. They've already voted. What matters now is how the EU Council votes. As far as I know, they need a qualified majority, meaning that 16 out of the 28 member states have to be for and 65% of the population of the union.

sonnyblarney 8y ago

It's a canard to talk about this in terms of 'representation or votes'. MEPs have very little power, and it was designed that way. Were this democratic, the underlying MEP issues would have been integrated long ago as the MEPs would have had a hand in crafting the bill. As it stands, they are a rubber stamp, or failsafe on some legislation. MEP's cannot even punt the unelected entities which make the law in the EU - a democratic deficit which is unique in the modern world. A better alternative to the A13 conundrum would be to 'start creating Googles' instead of having to legislate at them from 10K kilmoeters away.