Hacker News Reader

Comment by greatgib | Hacker News Reader

The European parlement is probably the best thing that we have in Europe, most good things and new rights come from there.

At the opposite, the European Commission is probably the worse that we can have. It is totally corrupted (see the vice president with bags of cash given by the Qatar and co) or at least morally corrupted by lobbies. And no one elected this persons with so much power by the way.

Good things to wonder is why America got shared access to all financial transactions of European citizens but the opposite is not true.

View on HN

< [the EC] is totally corrupted

The corrupt politician in question, Eva Kaili, was not a vice-president of the EC, but of the European Parliament. She was elected.

That sort of undermines your argument.

>most good things and new rights come from there

European Parliament literally does not have right of initiative.

> Good things to wonder is why America got shared access to all financial transactions of European citizens but the opposite is not true.

A lot of things are unequal between US and Europe. Eg., US bearing most of the cost of Europe's defense.

> the vice president with bags of cash given by the Qatar and

It was the vice president of the Parliament. Btw she was the vice president in charge of AI and Blockchain because ... reasons (she didnt have any qualifications)

The problem with both EC and EP is the lack of accountability , it's a very indirect system

> see the vice president with bags of cash given by the Qatar and co

Yeah, she was also behind the infanous cyber resilience act!

>the European Commission is probably the worse that we can have. It is totally corrupted (see the vice president with bags of cash given by the Qatar and co) or at least morally corrupted by lobbies.

Euroskepticism is a virus, but OTOH the Five Stars had a good idea: politics should not be a profession.

I'd love to see more folks do good work then pivot to entertainment if they want bags of Qatari cash in a way that doesn't involve destabilization

> And no one elected this persons with so much power by the way.

this is a very tired meme, they have been nominated and scrutinized by the people elected in what you called probably the best thing that we have in Europe i.e. the EU Parliament

edit: elections solve none of the problems people think they solve. proof is governments are corrupt even though they are elected by the people. if the objections is "we can't let them chose because they will meet in a room and exchange money for the position" well, how is it different from "they will meet in the same room exchanging the same money to decide who you can vote or not"?

elections are a consensus strategy, they do not solve social and political issues.

> this is a very tired meme, they have been nominated and scrutinized by the people elected in what you called probably the best thing that we have in Europe i.e. the EU Parliament

yes, in 2019 the Parliament were allowed to pick from a list of exactly one person (selected by another part of the EU)

the Parliament does the vetting, the countries Parliaments propose the candidates. It's all done by elected officials, what more do you want? the commission is a place for technicians, it's not a political entity.

it would be like electing the people in the HR department because the board of directors cast votes.

Said other part being the elected heada of states / government of each member nation.

They are directly nominated by the government of the European states. So no, they are not nominated by the parliament.

The idea that they would be legitimate because of being nominated by someone elected by proxy looks like to be a broken model in my opinion.

Especially, because, never an European had to vote for someone that had in their program or proposal anything said about the person's that will be nominated at this position. So this is different, in my opinion, of a model like US.

governments are elected in EU and the EU Parliament vets the candidates.

If that's the main objection, the POTUS is not elected by the people, is it undemocratic?

In the U.K. we allow our elected representatives to “nominate and scrutinise” appointed positions in the House of Lords.

The result is a bunch of dodgy appointments in exchange for political favours. The whole process reeks of corruption, but it’s tolerable because the Lords don’t have the power to originate or block law (although they can frustrate the process).

The appointed EU Commission is much worse. The appointment process for commissioners always seems to select failed/tainted/alcoholic nobodies. The current EU Commission Chief is a failed German politician whose stewardship of the defence ministry was condemned from all sides.

And the EU Commissioners have a LOT more power than the UK’s Lords. For example, the EU Commission is responsible for coming up with all new EU Directives, setting budgets and representing the EU internationally.

The European Parliament is a charade of representative democracy, in that it waves through pretty much all legislation that the Commission comes up with, and if it votes “no” it tends to get asked to vote again until it says “yes” (see Copyright Directive, 2019)

> the result is a bunch of dodgy appointments in exchange for political favours. The whole process reeks of corruption

how elections can fix that?

suppose politicians are chosen directly by the people, a corruptor could simply pay the people who decides the single candidates for each electoral college or could buy the votes directly. it has happened before and it's also way cheaper and easier than getting an appointment in some room godfather style.

> For example, the EU Commission is responsible for coming up with all new EU Directives, setting budgets and representing the EU internationally

that's the norm everywhere. technicians make the rules, the Parliament job is to discuss and ratify them.

In Italy laws are not written by the Parliament, but there are so called "commissions" that work on budget, directives, proposals etc

it's always been like that since we invented modern democracies.

> a corruptor could simply pay the people who decides the single candidates for each electoral college or could buy the votes directly

Corruption is hard to conceal if your strategy is to literally approach a majority of the electorate and try to bribe them directly!

> that's the norm everywhere. technicians make the rules, the Parliament job is to discuss and ratify them.

In that case, the question is: is the EU Commission staffed with good technicians?

My field is computer science and I can assure you the EU's digital laws are egregiously incompetant.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com