4 ms·

Please could you cite your sources for this. I think what you've typed is not representative of what happened here. My understanding is that the EU Council for

Please could you cite your sources for this. I think what you've typed is not representative of what happened here. My understanding is that the EU Council forced this second-reading, not the Commission. To provide evidence for my argument: https://fightchatcontrol.eu/ https://fightchatcontrol.eu/ Look at "Timeline". This is the Council, not the Commission. This is your elected heads of state. This is "democracy" in action. "Council and EPP attempting to bypass Parliament With negotiators still deadlocked on core issues, the Council and the European People's Party (EPP) are trying to sidestep Parliament by reviving the expired Chat Control 1.0. The Council plans to fast-track a rewritten proposal with identical content, effectively circumventing the Commission's right of initiative, democratic oversight, and a fresh opinion from the European Data Protection Supervisor (source)."

fosk 3mo ago
The Commission refused to withdraw the proposal after Parliament rejected it, leaving it on the table. The Council disagreed with Parliament’s rejection, formally forcing a second reading. Both the European Commission and the Council itself are not DIRECTLY elected EU bodies. Potato, potahto, tomato, tomahto.
- aosaigh 3mo ago
  Again, sources?
  - fosk 3mo ago
    Parliament rejects the proposal: https://oeil.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/en/procedure-file/pdf?reference=2025%2F0429%28COD%29 https://oeil.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/en/procedure-file/pdf?r... Council pushes it forward: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2026/07/02/council-moves-to-reinstate-interim-measure-to-combat-child-sexual-abuse-online/ https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2026... From the last article: "The Council position will now be examined by the European Parliament, under second reading.". Note that this is technically accurate under absolute majority rules for rejection (not for approving), but practically is where the "cheating" happens - as described in my original parent comment - because of the perverse procedures of the EU that are designed to basically make it almost impossible to go against the agenda. The Commission did not withdraw it: no source because it stayed "pending". The EU procedures are maliciously designed against the Parliament while preserving the technicality of plausible deniability. How do we call this architecture in software? We call it a "backdoor", except this one is embedded in the EU legislative process.
    - munksbeer 3mo ago
      The EU Council are the democratically elected leaders of the member states. How is them deciding the direction not "democratic"?
      - fosk 3mo ago
        The Council of the European Union - that pushed this forward - is composed of national ministers that are directly elected to the Council itself and are simply there because they are appointed as ministers under their own country's constitutional system. Ministers are appointed, not elected. Unlike the European Parliament which is directly elected by EU citizens. Conveniently, the EU citizens have been silenced on this matter despite the Parliament denying this full proposal not once, but twice.
        gls2ro 3mo ago
        > Ministers are appointed, not elected. I dont understand this line of reasoning about EU: Ministers are appointed by people we vote. In most democracies the entire government is appointed and maybe indirect voted as a whole (by parliament and maybe directly by citizens). What I am trying to say is people who proposed this are representatives of those countries (even if indirect their citizens votes vor the party that appointed them). So representation is not the problem. The problem is citizens (at large) voting only on personal interest and not thinking or not understanding the second order effects. If you don't like what Council did here make sure next round of elections the party that proposed those ministers will not get elected in your country an should not have the power to form a government. We seem to expect country officials to be even better when playing at EU level and think about yet a greater good than they are doing in their own countries.
        munksbeer 3mo ago
        The design of the EU which gives the member states elected politicians (heads of state) the most power is very intentional.
- doikor 3mo ago
  The council is the prime minister or president (depending on the system). The commission is the government. The government mostly does what the PM/president tells it to do.
lou1306 3mo ago
The Council must go at some point. It is a "legislative" body... composed of members of the _executive_ branch of the individual countries. Granted, that's not the only problem with EU governance, but it is a rather glaring anomaly in terms of transparency and accountability. Furthermore, at least in the case of Italy & other parliamentary systems, there's something like 3 levels of indirection between the people and their "representative" in the Council: People elect members of the Parliament -> MPs decide who is the Prime Minister -> PM decides who sits in the Council We should likely just replace it with either a "EU Senate", where each country elects the same number of senators, _or_ a chamber with truly European elections (as in, every EU citizen may vote for any candidate, regardless of their nation). But the latter option seems still out of reach as of today.
- fosk 3mo ago
  How are we going to change it? They are simply going to pass a second-reading on a proposal to bring it back and use the same trick over and over again. All it takes is for one person to be "sick" at home for them to get it their way. The EU voters have practically gifted their future to a bunch of technocrats. Over time (decades), it will get worse too, as inevitably power corrupts them more and more. The EU is simply never going to represent the EU voters when it goes against their agenda. Want proof? They just did it.
  - lou1306 3mo ago
    "The EU" is a loose term. At least in _some_ cases (such as this one), the Parliament has shown more attention to the voters. I'll concede that the deck is stacked against it, but this reflects a common trend in the West of overpowering the executive branch at the expense of the representative bodies.
- rayiner 3mo ago
  Why not just have two bodies like every other parliamentary system? Europeans elect an MP and each member state elects a Senator. Then the majority party in the Parliament appoints a Prime Minister, who can appoint a cabinet. Nobody is more than two steps away from an elected position.
sampo 3mo ago
I think what you've typed is not representative of how EU works. The Council [1], also known as the Council of the European Union and the Council of Ministers, does not consist of heads of state. The body that consists of heads of state is the European Council [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council

fosk 3mo ago

The Commission refused to withdraw the proposal after Parliament rejected it, leaving it on the table. The Council disagreed with Parliament’s rejection, formally forcing a second reading. Both the European Commission and the Council itself are not DIRECTLY elected EU bodies. Potato, potahto, tomato, tomahto.

aosaigh 3mo ago
Again, sources?
- fosk 3mo ago
  Parliament rejects the proposal: https://oeil.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/en/procedure-file/pdf?reference=2025%2F0429%28COD%29 https://oeil.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/en/procedure-file/pdf?r... Council pushes it forward: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2026/07/02/council-moves-to-reinstate-interim-measure-to-combat-child-sexual-abuse-online/ https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2026... From the last article: "The Council position will now be examined by the European Parliament, under second reading.". Note that this is technically accurate under absolute majority rules for rejection (not for approving), but practically is where the "cheating" happens - as described in my original parent comment - because of the perverse procedures of the EU that are designed to basically make it almost impossible to go against the agenda. The Commission did not withdraw it: no source because it stayed "pending". The EU procedures are maliciously designed against the Parliament while preserving the technicality of plausible deniability. How do we call this architecture in software? We call it a "backdoor", except this one is embedded in the EU legislative process.
  - munksbeer 3mo ago
    The EU Council are the democratically elected leaders of the member states. How is them deciding the direction not "democratic"?
    - fosk 3mo ago
      The Council of the European Union - that pushed this forward - is composed of national ministers that are directly elected to the Council itself and are simply there because they are appointed as ministers under their own country's constitutional system. Ministers are appointed, not elected. Unlike the European Parliament which is directly elected by EU citizens. Conveniently, the EU citizens have been silenced on this matter despite the Parliament denying this full proposal not once, but twice.
      - gls2ro 3mo ago
        > Ministers are appointed, not elected. I dont understand this line of reasoning about EU: Ministers are appointed by people we vote. In most democracies the entire government is appointed and maybe indirect voted as a whole (by parliament and maybe directly by citizens). What I am trying to say is people who proposed this are representatives of those countries (even if indirect their citizens votes vor the party that appointed them). So representation is not the problem. The problem is citizens (at large) voting only on personal interest and not thinking or not understanding the second order effects. If you don't like what Council did here make sure next round of elections the party that proposed those ministers will not get elected in your country an should not have the power to form a government. We seem to expect country officials to be even better when playing at EU level and think about yet a greater good than they are doing in their own countries.
        munksbeer 3mo ago
        The design of the EU which gives the member states elected politicians (heads of state) the most power is very intentional.
doikor 3mo ago
The council is the prime minister or president (depending on the system). The commission is the government. The government mostly does what the PM/president tells it to do.

lou1306 3mo ago

The Council must go at some point. It is a "legislative" body... composed of members of the _executive_ branch of the individual countries. Granted, that's not the only problem with EU governance, but it is a rather glaring anomaly in terms of transparency and accountability. Furthermore, at least in the case of Italy & other parliamentary systems, there's something like 3 levels of indirection between the people and their "representative" in the Council: People elect members of the Parliament -> MPs decide who is the Prime Minister -> PM decides who sits in the Council We should likely just replace it with either a "EU Senate", where each country elects the same number of senators, _or_ a chamber with truly European elections (as in, every EU citizen may vote for any candidate, regardless of their nation). But the latter option seems still out of reach as of today.

fosk 3mo ago
How are we going to change it? They are simply going to pass a second-reading on a proposal to bring it back and use the same trick over and over again. All it takes is for one person to be "sick" at home for them to get it their way. The EU voters have practically gifted their future to a bunch of technocrats. Over time (decades), it will get worse too, as inevitably power corrupts them more and more. The EU is simply never going to represent the EU voters when it goes against their agenda. Want proof? They just did it.
- lou1306 3mo ago
  "The EU" is a loose term. At least in _some_ cases (such as this one), the Parliament has shown more attention to the voters. I'll concede that the deck is stacked against it, but this reflects a common trend in the West of overpowering the executive branch at the expense of the representative bodies.
rayiner 3mo ago
Why not just have two bodies like every other parliamentary system? Europeans elect an MP and each member state elects a Senator. Then the majority party in the Parliament appoints a Prime Minister, who can appoint a cabinet. Nobody is more than two steps away from an elected position.

sampo 3mo ago

I think what you've typed is not representative of how EU works. The Council [1], also known as the Council of the European Union and the Council of Ministers, does not consist of heads of state. The body that consists of heads of state is the European Council [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council