7 ms·

The Commission refused to withdraw the proposal after Parliament rejected it, leaving it on the table. The Council disagreed with Parliament’s rejection, formal

by 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.
        fosk 3mo ago
        You are confusing the EU Council with the Council of the European Union. No head of state was involved in the discussion we are having today. By the way my personal opinion is that the confusing names are by design, to give the appearance that head of states are involved in decisions that have nothing to do with them, democracy in the EU is just an illusion.
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.

by fosk 3mo ago

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.
        fosk 3mo ago
        You are confusing the EU Council with the Council of the European Union. No head of state was involved in the discussion we are having today. By the way my personal opinion is that the confusing names are by design, to give the appearance that head of states are involved in decisions that have nothing to do with them, democracy in the EU is just an illusion.

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.