4 ms·

Honest question, what about Strasbourg?

by throwawayay02 5y ago

anticensor 5y ago
Did you mean Straßburg?
- based2 5y ago
  https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/19/why-does-parliament-move-between-brussels-and-strasbourg https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/19/why-does-parli...
- ku-man 5y ago
  Wow, wow, those are dangerous letters my friend.
SllX 5y ago
One of the two capitals of the EU. Why does the EU need two capitals? Because France wanted a win. The European Parliament would love to pick up and leave Strasbourg, but it is legally bound to meet there several times a year for a full session despite the majority of its work being in Brussels.
- WastingMyTime89 5y ago
  > One of the two capitals of the EU. Why does the EU need two capitals? Because France wanted a win. Yes, it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Strasbourg is the capital of a region which was highly contested between France and Germany and changed hands multiple times in the last two centuries and is seen as a symbole of the reconciliation between the two countries. It's also not linked at all with the fact it was already the seat of the Council of Europe when the parliament was put there. Also, the EU doesn't have two capitals. It has none.
  - SllX 5y ago
    As a general principle, the capital is wherever the seat of the Executive and Legislature is based from. The European Parliament is split between two cities, spending a minority of its time in Strasbourg. You don’t have to put it on paper to call it a capital. The symbolic rhetorical cover is interesting, irrelevant, and fulfilled by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and other CoE institutions. More importantly, the European Union already symbolically represents a reconciliation between its member nations encompassing more than merely Germany and France. Basing the European Parliament out of Strasbourg for a time may have made sense as it could share a building with an existing pan-European institution, but to keep it legally bound to continue spending a minority of the year there when the bulk of the EU’s institutions that the European Parliament is concerned with are in another city in another country is just silly and entirely rectifiable.
    - WastingMyTime89 5y ago
      > As a general principle, the capital is wherever the seat of the Executive and Legislature is based from. That's what people call a de facto capital. Still the EU intentionaly has no capital in its laws. > The symbolic rhetorical cover is interesting, irrelevant It's in no way irrelevant nor a cover. It's the reason Strasbourg was selected as the seat of the parliement in the 50s. You can't discard facts because they don't suit your worldview. I will personally stop this pointless discussion.
      - SllX 5y ago
        > That's what people call a de facto capital. It’s also what people just call a capital. > It's in no way irrelevant nor a cover. It's the reason Strasbourg was selected as the seat of the parliement in the 50s. In the 1950s. First: the given justification for any policy decision particularly in democratic societies is always rhetorical. Rhetoric is intended to persuade. Factual accuracy is not mutually exclusive with rhetoric. Second: It was in 1992 that the decision was made to keep the European Parliament in Strasbourg per the decision of Edinburgh European Council of 11 and 12 December 1992.[1] Prior to this it was already located in Strasbourg, which for a time did make sense. However when the European Union chose to revisit this issue, it chose not to consolidate its institutions into one location, but to keep them spread apart and thus the European Parliament now splits its time between what are effectively two capital cities with all the additional overhead costs this incurs in the time and money of the taxpayers and the productivity of the MEPs and staff. [1] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/20492/1992_december_-_edinburgh__eng_.pdf https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/20492/1992_december_-_... [page 47] [pdf]

Honest question, what about Strasbourg?

anticensor 5y ago

Did you mean Straßburg?

based2 5y ago
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/19/why-does-parliament-move-between-brussels-and-strasbourg https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/19/why-does-parli...
ku-man 5y ago
Wow, wow, those are dangerous letters my friend.

SllX 5y ago

One of the two capitals of the EU. Why does the EU need two capitals? Because France wanted a win. The European Parliament would love to pick up and leave Strasbourg, but it is legally bound to meet there several times a year for a full session despite the majority of its work being in Brussels.

WastingMyTime89 5y ago
> One of the two capitals of the EU. Why does the EU need two capitals? Because France wanted a win. Yes, it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Strasbourg is the capital of a region which was highly contested between France and Germany and changed hands multiple times in the last two centuries and is seen as a symbole of the reconciliation between the two countries. It's also not linked at all with the fact it was already the seat of the Council of Europe when the parliament was put there. Also, the EU doesn't have two capitals. It has none.
- SllX 5y ago
  As a general principle, the capital is wherever the seat of the Executive and Legislature is based from. The European Parliament is split between two cities, spending a minority of its time in Strasbourg. You don’t have to put it on paper to call it a capital. The symbolic rhetorical cover is interesting, irrelevant, and fulfilled by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and other CoE institutions. More importantly, the European Union already symbolically represents a reconciliation between its member nations encompassing more than merely Germany and France. Basing the European Parliament out of Strasbourg for a time may have made sense as it could share a building with an existing pan-European institution, but to keep it legally bound to continue spending a minority of the year there when the bulk of the EU’s institutions that the European Parliament is concerned with are in another city in another country is just silly and entirely rectifiable.
  - WastingMyTime89 5y ago
    > As a general principle, the capital is wherever the seat of the Executive and Legislature is based from. That's what people call a de facto capital. Still the EU intentionaly has no capital in its laws. > The symbolic rhetorical cover is interesting, irrelevant It's in no way irrelevant nor a cover. It's the reason Strasbourg was selected as the seat of the parliement in the 50s. You can't discard facts because they don't suit your worldview. I will personally stop this pointless discussion.
    - SllX 5y ago
      > That's what people call a de facto capital. It’s also what people just call a capital. > It's in no way irrelevant nor a cover. It's the reason Strasbourg was selected as the seat of the parliement in the 50s. In the 1950s. First: the given justification for any policy decision particularly in democratic societies is always rhetorical. Rhetoric is intended to persuade. Factual accuracy is not mutually exclusive with rhetoric. Second: It was in 1992 that the decision was made to keep the European Parliament in Strasbourg per the decision of Edinburgh European Council of 11 and 12 December 1992.[1] Prior to this it was already located in Strasbourg, which for a time did make sense. However when the European Union chose to revisit this issue, it chose not to consolidate its institutions into one location, but to keep them spread apart and thus the European Parliament now splits its time between what are effectively two capital cities with all the additional overhead costs this incurs in the time and money of the taxpayers and the productivity of the MEPs and staff. [1] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/20492/1992_december_-_edinburgh__eng_.pdf https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/20492/1992_december_-_... [page 47] [pdf]