Hacker News Reader

Comment by JulianMorrison | Hacker News Reader

Well, to be fair, it is mildly unrealistic they'd target voters. Or at least, their voters.

1) the EU commission, the only EU institution with real lawgiving and executive power, is not elected (they are hand-picked by foreign ministers of EU nations, which are hand-picked by indirectly elected parliaments)

2) Jose Manuel Barrosso is an ex-communist (ex-Maoist to be exact). His style of government, shall we say, "reflects this".

3) You only have to visit Brussels and ask about the many CD signs on the road, or talk to a few people working for the EU and ask about "fonctionnaires" to hear exactly how responsible they feel towards their voters.

Your first point is what I keep asking pro EU people here in Europe about and for which I never get a satisfying answer on why this is acceptable. This and the cluelessness of their lawmakers when it comes to tech makes me thank the higher entity every day for not being an EU citizen (since I'm Swiss).

Actually, the European Commission is elected by the European Parliament (after having been proposed by the European Council), which is directly elected by the citizens of the member states. From article 17 (7) of the Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union:

"Taking into account the elections to the European Parliament and after having held the appropriate consultations, the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, shall propose to the European Parliament a candidate for President of the Commission. This candidate shall be elected by the European Parliament by a majority of its component members. If he does not obtain the required majority, the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, shall within one month propose a new candidate who shall be elected by the European Parliament following the same procedure."

This is not at all different from how the British Prime Minister or the German Chancellor are elected; in fact, the British Prime Minister is technically not even elected; the requirement to have majority support in the House of Commons is implicit when he or she is appointed by the monarch.

The European Parliament can also force the EC to resign via a motion of censure (though that requires a 2/3 majority), which is what happened to the Santer Commission [1]. From article 17 (8):

"The Commission, as a body, shall be responsible to the European Parliament. In accordance with Article 234 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the European Parliament may vote on a motion of censure of the Commission. If such a motion is carried, the members of the Commission shall resign as a body and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall resign from the duties that he carries out in the Commission."

While there are plenty of issues with the functioning of the EU, it is simply not the case that the EC is not elected.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santer_Commission#Resignation

Where did I say that there isn't an election process for the EC? The point I'm trying to make is that the EC has way too much lawmaking power for it to be elected indirectly. The way I understand it, what the EC decides are not mere propositions to the parliament. Parliament seems to have to actively pressure to take down a new law by EC, which is a reversal of roles.

Also, concerning the parliament, I'm wondering: Do people actually have much choice in whom to elect? What do you need to do in order to rally for parliament? Are there different party lists for example? Is it depending on the national parties? E.g. do I need support from a national party to get into the EU parliament?

Basically at the beginning, the EU was an inter-governmental construct (like NATO or the UN). It has grown into something more government-like, but those with power in the existing inter-governmental institutions don't want to give it up.

Why? Less voters + money = more certainty ;)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com