3 ms·

The main thing is that having them elected directly would mean holding an election across all EU countries - and I think that would be great for European unity.

• yorwba 3y ago
  There will be an election across all EU countries in 2024, to decide the composition of the European Parliament. The previous one was held in 2019. That you apparently don't know that indicates that simply holding an EU-wide election doesn't guarantee sufficient debate.
  • nivenkos 3y ago
    But you vote for the parties in your country who form a bloc - it isn't really a vote across borders in the same way as a Presidential election would be. The Parliament is also very weak and can't propose laws, etc.
    • phtrivier 3y ago
      This seems pretty common in "fédérations" (or similar systems.) I guess Californians and Texans can both vote for local politicians under the same party, but nothing force the politicians to vote together once in Congress ? Also, I think as a bloc, the EU is not entirely ready yet for, say, French people to directly vote for non French people. But who knows. As for the balance of powers in the EU, it's far from perfect. But coming from France, who am I to judge ?
• phtrivier 3y ago
  > The main thing is that having them elected directly would mean holding an election across all EU countries - and I think that would be great for European unity. I'm not sure I get your point. The European Parlement Election _is_ held accross all EU contries "almost" at the same time. It's spread accross a few days to respect the voting tradition of each member state, but the campaign very much happen at the same time for everyone. There were debates between the "heads", but there you hit the language barrier - we're not going to see a Spanish candidate arguing with a German one in English on French Television any time soon. > Like have French, Spanish, Greek, Swedes, Germans, etc. all debating and voting - and people would actually know the background of who the President of the EU commission is! To be honest, the 2019 elections were the first time it _did_ felt like the voting was occuring across the bloc. Each cross-european party had a few clear faces for candidates for the Commission, beforehand. Had the PPE received a clear majority, we would be talking about the Webber Commission - except, no-one really won, and they had to pick a compromise candidate. > Right now VdL has just failed upwards She is the grand tradition of the parlementary leaders chosen because they were "the least worse alternative", and "bad enough to be acceptable by everyone." Again, I don't know if it is structural, or just the result of an election without a clear majority. I understand this is an issue because she was only known in Germany. Would it have been better to at least choose a "compromise candidate" that had previous EU-level experience ? Ironically, you have to notice that the British People did not vote for Sunak either ;) I don't know what's the structural way to avoid "an elected body not agreeing on a name chosen before the election". Do you stick to the name, until you reach gridlock ? Do you setup your elections to ensure a clear majority, artifically reducing the diversity of your electorate until you have a duopoly ?
  • nivenkos 3y ago
    > Ironically, you have to notice that the British People did not vote for Sunak either ;) But VdL is the head of the Commission not Parliament (which is also far too weak IMO). The equivalent would be the King in Britain, which is obviously even worse, same for the House of Lords, etc. but two wrongs don't make a right. I think really the Parliament should be more powerful with PR voting for the European blocs directly rather than local parties with the lists, etc. and the President should also be directly elected. Basically give the EU parliament more power in return for greater democracy.