7 ms·

What does that even mean? The EU doesn't need Finland's "vote". It's decided at the EU level.

by Proven 3y ago

nixgeek 3y ago
It's going to vote soon. It isn't just "decided" at the EU level, there is a vote. Voting power is proportional to EU citizenship and to pass it needs a supermajority. It's not just Finland which opposes this either (they have a small population - 5.6M citizens). Larger countries like Germany (83M citizens) also oppose it but I also don't think they've quite so clearly stated they will vote against. Austria (9.1M) and Estonia (1.4M) are also mentioned and if they all vote "No", that is a bit over 99M people which is only 22% of EU citizens. So not enough to prevent it passing. No idea where the rest of the EU bloc sits on Yes/No, I'm hoping it does *not* pass. Quoting from the translation where they explain how it works: "EU countries will vote on the proposal at the end of October. At that time, the proposal will go through, if it is not opposed by a number of countries representing a total of at least 35 percent of EU citizens." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_member_states_by_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_member_...
- miohtama 3y ago
  Countries that are going to vote yes - Spain (caught using Pegasus spyware to spy their own politicians) - Hungary (Orban has good dictator vibes) - Cyprus https://www.wired.com/story/europe-break-encryption-leaked-document-csa-law/ https://www.wired.com/story/europe-break-encryption-leaked-d...
Reubend 3y ago
My understanding from a translation of the article is that each country will vote, and this committee decision bind Finland to a "no" vote. > EU countries will vote on the proposal at the end of October. At that time, the proposal will go through, if it is not opposed by a number of countries representing a total of at least 35 percent of EU citizens.
3836293648 3y ago
There are two votes, one of all the MEPs and one of each country's government. You need a majority in parliament and not enough to veto you (~1/3) in the minister council (or whatever their proper English name is)
arlcode 3y ago
There are indeed majority requirements to pass a directive at EU Level. In this case in the Council (of member states) of the European Union needs to pass with 55% of the member states agreeing and they need to have 65% of the EU population. In addition, the (directly elected) European Parliament will need to pass the proposed directive with a simple majority. So calling the "vote" unneeded is not true at all.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
mrmanner 3y ago
The council, where all member states are represented, will vote on this. It's basically like the senate in the US, except the states are represented by ministers instead of elected senators.
- ajb 3y ago
  Exactly. It's also worth noting that the US Senate was originally not elected either. The transition to an elected Senate was triggered by two states individually deciding to elect their Senator, then the rest followed. The same could happen in the EU, which would make it much more democratic. And it would only take one country to make the first move.
  - nsajko 3y ago
    It seems you don't know the EU has a parliament: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament > Since 1979, the Parliament has been directly elected every five years by the citizens of the European Union through universal suffrage.
    - lttlrck 3y ago
      How did you infer that? The council and parliament are two separate bodies.
    - mongol 3y ago
      Pretty rude assumption to make. Nothing in parent's reply indicating anything about that.
    - ajb 3y ago
      I don't know why you would bother to reply if you are going to assume that level of ignorance. Yes,the parliament exists. I have voted for members of it. It is the most democratic part of the EU. The rules give it much more influence than hereto. But it has problems. 1) The Council, which is not so democratic, can veto it 2) The parliament is huge, so each member has very limited influence 3) Because of 2) it has not succeeded in creating an EU 'public sphere' or 'demos'. The 'parties' are just agglomerations of national parties. When you think of EU politicians, who are the big names? They are a) national figures and , b) Commissioners. Rarely do parliamentarians become well known,and usually for some other reason (Eg Nigel Farage). I stand by my statement that the EU would be much more democratic if the council were elected. Firstly, do you really think the US was not more democratic when the Senate became elected? Secondly, it would mean that there were 'big figures' that get elected at an EU level. That would get the pubic much more interested and that is a significant part of what it means to be democratic. It doesn't matter how democratic the rules are of nobody cares.
generic92034 3y ago
The Council has veto powers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union). If the proposed law needs unanimous agreement of the Council, it makes sense to talk of Finland's vote in that context. Even if only a simple majority is needed, it would be at least a sign that there is resistance in the Council.

What does that even mean? The EU doesn't need Finland's "vote". It's decided at the EU level.

by Proven 3y ago

What does that even mean? The EU doesn't need Finland's "vote". It's decided at the EU level.

It's going to vote soon. It isn't just "decided" at the EU level, there is a vote. Voting power is proportional to EU citizenship and to pass it needs a supermajority. It's not just Finland which opposes this either (they have a small population - 5.6M citizens). Larger countries like Germany (83M citizens) also oppose it but I also don't think they've quite so clearly stated they will vote against. Austria (9.1M) and Estonia (1.4M) are also mentioned and if they all vote "No", that is a bit over 99M people which is only 22% of EU citizens. So not enough to prevent it passing. No idea where the rest of the EU bloc sits on Yes/No, I'm hoping it does *not* pass. Quoting from the translation where they explain how it works: "EU countries will vote on the proposal at the end of October. At that time, the proposal will go through, if it is not opposed by a number of countries representing a total of at least 35 percent of EU citizens." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_member_states_by_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_member_...

miohtama 3y ago
Countries that are going to vote yes - Spain (caught using Pegasus spyware to spy their own politicians) - Hungary (Orban has good dictator vibes) - Cyprus https://www.wired.com/story/europe-break-encryption-leaked-document-csa-law/ https://www.wired.com/story/europe-break-encryption-leaked-d...

Reubend 3y ago

My understanding from a translation of the article is that each country will vote, and this committee decision bind Finland to a "no" vote. > EU countries will vote on the proposal at the end of October. At that time, the proposal will go through, if it is not opposed by a number of countries representing a total of at least 35 percent of EU citizens.

3836293648 3y ago

There are two votes, one of all the MEPs and one of each country's government. You need a majority in parliament and not enough to veto you (~1/3) in the minister council (or whatever their proper English name is)

arlcode 3y ago

There are indeed majority requirements to pass a directive at EU Level. In this case in the Council (of member states) of the European Union needs to pass with 55% of the member states agreeing and they need to have 65% of the EU population. In addition, the (directly elected) European Parliament will need to pass the proposed directive with a simple majority. So calling the "vote" unneeded is not true at all.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

mrmanner 3y ago

The council, where all member states are represented, will vote on this. It's basically like the senate in the US, except the states are represented by ministers instead of elected senators.

ajb 3y ago
Exactly. It's also worth noting that the US Senate was originally not elected either. The transition to an elected Senate was triggered by two states individually deciding to elect their Senator, then the rest followed. The same could happen in the EU, which would make it much more democratic. And it would only take one country to make the first move.
- nsajko 3y ago
  It seems you don't know the EU has a parliament: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament > Since 1979, the Parliament has been directly elected every five years by the citizens of the European Union through universal suffrage.
  - lttlrck 3y ago
    How did you infer that? The council and parliament are two separate bodies.
  - mongol 3y ago
    Pretty rude assumption to make. Nothing in parent's reply indicating anything about that.
  - ajb 3y ago
    I don't know why you would bother to reply if you are going to assume that level of ignorance. Yes,the parliament exists. I have voted for members of it. It is the most democratic part of the EU. The rules give it much more influence than hereto. But it has problems. 1) The Council, which is not so democratic, can veto it 2) The parliament is huge, so each member has very limited influence 3) Because of 2) it has not succeeded in creating an EU 'public sphere' or 'demos'. The 'parties' are just agglomerations of national parties. When you think of EU politicians, who are the big names? They are a) national figures and , b) Commissioners. Rarely do parliamentarians become well known,and usually for some other reason (Eg Nigel Farage). I stand by my statement that the EU would be much more democratic if the council were elected. Firstly, do you really think the US was not more democratic when the Senate became elected? Secondly, it would mean that there were 'big figures' that get elected at an EU level. That would get the pubic much more interested and that is a significant part of what it means to be democratic. It doesn't matter how democratic the rules are of nobody cares.

generic92034 3y ago

The Council has veto powers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union). If the proposed law needs unanimous agreement of the Council, it makes sense to talk of Finland's vote in that context. Even if only a simple majority is needed, it would be at least a sign that there is resistance in the Council.