Hacker News Reader

Comment by Create | Hacker News Reader

Note, that people who have a clue about why the EU came to be at all are either dead or have been managed away. BXL became a parking place for second rate politicians (understatement). Manipulators like Cameron, Farage know this too: and this is the tragedy.

McCreevy, déçu de voir ses arguments taillés en pièces, ne prenne la parole, le visage rougeaud, sur un ton énervé:

"Monsieur Rocard, si c'est la guerre que vous voulez, vous allez l'avoir."

Réponse de Rocard, d'un ton posé et ferme: "Monsieur McCreevy, des guerres, dans ma carrière, j'en ai déjà arrêté deux. Mais ce n'est pas parce que je suis un homme de paix que je céderai à l'intimidation. Je maintiens donc mes positions."

View on HN

> BXL became a parking place for second rate politicians

This is primarily the fault of national governments, for which BXL is a convenient scapegoat for their own mistakes, and secondarily of voters who ignored European elections for too long. Post-Lisbon, MEPs do have significant powers and ultimately designate the Commission President, so it does matter who you vote for AND that you vote at all.

For McCreevy in particular, the Irish government should shoulder a lot of the blame for nominating him, at a time when Commissioners were extremely powerful. These days a Commissioner so divisive would likely get shut down by EuroParliament. Also, I might be partisan but the last three Commissions were mostly a reflection of centre-right parties (EPP etc), which still command a majority in EuroParliament as well as in the Council. As long as people keep voting right-wing, we will get right-wing policies.

Like with all democracies, we get the politicians we deserve, not the ones we need.

We are talking about the same thing: those managed away from domestic power get compensated by a bxl holiday if their blackmail powers warrant it.

The Parliament was and still is weaker than the Commission and the Council, the latter two usually work in tandem anyway. (Actually, the swpat rejection by the EP wasn't about values, but rather an attempt to demonstrate capabilities, unseen before or after for that matter, see belgacom).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/07/nsa-gchq-surve...

What was the consequence for those behind?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/06/security-and-l...

In a democracy you need to be informed (see NHS campaign). That is incompatible with W. Lippmann's Society of the Spectacle, privacy and freedom of thought.

The Parliament now has veto powers on almost all directives, as well as a (not practiced yet) right to send packing the entire Commission.

It does not have executive powers, so it cannot "take action". To be fair, it does need additional powers to initiate legislative action rather than just blocking or shaping laws that Commission and Council introduce; but that's blocked by euroskeptics who think BXL already has too much power and proposals should be left to national governments.

The reason EP and Commission/Council don't lock horns that often is that, when you get down to details, pretty much everyone agrees that European Directives are right in principle (i.e. harmonizing this or that) and it's just about hammering out details (which are often just guidelines anyway and are left to national parliaments to sort out) and trade a few horses. Swpat and copyright extension were among the very few subjects that were simply too controversial to pass, so MEPs put the hammer down - at a time when their hammer was much smaller than it is now.

As the EP gets a bigger role, it's on the electorate to send better-prepared MEPs. After 2009 old practices should be on their way out, as long as we push for this change to continue.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com