0:20 UPDATED INFO: The College of Commissioners is composed of the President of the Commission, eight Vice-Presidents, including three Executive Vice-Presidents, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and 18 Commissioners, each responsible for a portfolio.
Great videos about how the EU works! Really appreciated it and will share to friends so they will wont forget to vote in the elections!! :) Keep up the good work!
Correction to: "Like MEPs, Commissioners are not expected to work for the interests of their member states." In fact, MEPs represent the people in their member states who directly elected them. So they do work for the interests of their member states. The only legislative body in the European Union that represents the interests of the European Union itself is the European Commission -- it is important to note that both the Council of the EU, the European Parliament, and the European Commission work for the interests of three different groups as that is a part of the democratic "checks and balances" of the EU system.
You’re mostly right, but you miss our point. MEPs indeed represents the people that directly elected them and the three main institutions indeed each represent another actor (the people, the EU, the Member States). This is exactly the point: an MEP, like a Commissioner, is not expected to represent his/her home member state (that’s the Council’s job). Rather an MEP represents the citizens that voted for him/her. MEPs from the same country might have very conflicting interests and vote differently. In a system where MEPs would have to work for the interests of their member state, they would all vote along with their Ministers in the Council.
+Stylus Phantasticus The EU takes Montesquieu's principles to a whole new lever, whereas most nations opt to divide the power into 3-2 branches, the EU divides into 5.
The European Council does. I see I made a mistake in the annotation/link (confusing with the same logo :P ), thanks for pointing that out, I corrected it now.
This is extremely helpful, but could you please clarify the Commission's election process? When a candidate for the Presidency of the European Commission is proposed by the European Council, is 'unanimity' required among European council members for this proposition to be forwarded to the European Parliament. Additionally, when a candidate is proposed by the European Council to be elected as the President of the Commission, does this mean they are the sole candidate name on the ballot paper for European Parliamentarians to approve or reject? Many thanks.
Moreover, has there ever been a scenario in which the European Parliament has rejected the European Council's proposed candidate for the Presidency of the Commission? Or has it ever rejected any of the 27 political appointees of the Commission President?
Hi Sam, The Council’s candidate for President of the Commission is decided by qualified majority, not unanimity. And yes, the Council proposes a single candidate to Parliament to reject or approve. If rejected, the Council will propose a new candidate to the European Parliament within a month (You can find the official texts for this in: TEU Article 17:7). To the best of our knowledge, the EP has never rejected a President of the Commission. However, it did force the resignation of the Santer Commission in 1999 (EP had confirmed the Santer Commission in 1995 though). Regarding a single Commissioner: Officially the European Parliament may only reject or accept the Commission as a whole, so strictly speaking it has never rejected a single Commissioner. On (at least) two occasions it did, however, threaten to reject the proposed Commission if a single Commissioner was not replaced (which basically means they rejected that individual Commissioner). Rocco Buttiglione in 2004 and Alenka Bratusek in 2014. These two cases, in particular the Buttiglione affair, are prime examples for the EP assuming more power and influence.
Thank you very much for your response. Hypothetically, If the European Parliament voted to reject the European Council's proposed Commission, would the entire proposed College of Commissioners have to be replaced? Or would the EP specify which Commissioners it disapproved of? If the College of Commissioners is accepted or rejected by Parliament collectively, then does this mean the President appoints his/her cabinet/college of Commissioners before he/she is approved by Parliament themselves? In other words, do they decide who will be in their Commission cabinet after they are proposed as candidates for the commission presidency by the Council, but before they are approved of by the Parliament? Moreover, does the Parliament use the voting mechanism of an 'absolute majority' to approve of a proposed college of commissioners? Thanks
To get a better feel of how the process works, it might be interesting to read en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barroso_Commission (heading ‘Commissioner hearings’). It gives you a better idea of the process and shows its more of a negotiation where the proposed Commission can be changed to convince Parliament to give its consent. Here MEPs made clear which Commissioners they disapproved of in the proposed Commission and why. No, the President is elected first (before the Lisbon treaty Parliament only gave consent). After the candidate has been elected by Parliament, he/she as the President-elect adopts a list of Commissioners with the Council. Parliament then gives its consent for the body as a whole (President, High Representative and the other Commissioners). Yes, consent for the proposed Commission is given by absolute majority.
I kind of miss any mention of Spitzenkandidat in the election process of the Commission President. What is described in the video really feels more like Barroso era.
Thank you very much for this, very well put. My own question on the whole idea of the EU is this: Why do we need a "United States of Europe"? Why do individual countries NEED to be controlled by a huge army of "politicians" . The real purpose of the EU should be simply to oversee a smooth transition of trade between each member. NO MORE, NO LESS! Anything else is quite rightly viewed with suspicion .
That much is true as long as you only think about internal trade. However, on a global scale some form of government is needed to pursue ones interests. Right now, our foreign policy is to a notable amount being dictated by the US (which seems to be slowly ceding that influence to China). This also affects our trade. To give one example: looking at current news, it is fairly possible that the US might sanction European companies in Cuba. As a consequence, the EU needs to defend its own interests and that is only possible with a government that has some weight in its negotiation. How centralized this government should be and how exactly it should work, might still be a relevant question though.
So politburo elects Kim il Juncker, our great leader, as rtl/sbs/bbc Pravda explain how benevolent our great leaders of the european empire need to create an european army. I believe they are no ordinary men but rule by devine right. All hail the new order.
Do you really think news channels are positive about the Commissioners? My experience is that national media are rather critical and negative towards EU officials.
While I'm not a fan of Junker (he is a conservative and started negotiating TTIP), I do like how he slanders authoritarians to their face and slaps them instead of cowering down to them
Depends on how you see it. You have the people who do a lot of the work (the civil servants) and the people who decide on what will become a law (the Parliament and Council). The people working at the Commission are civil servants. Just like with any other national government (or normal office) minutes are not made and published of all meetings they have. Their final proposals and supporting documents are though. In that sense the EU Commission is probably more transparent than most national governments (even though their websites are not always the most user friendly, but then again, which government website is...). As for the European Parliament, the EU is actually incredibly transparent. On their website (same issue with friendliness) you can find agenda's, minutes and all sorts of other documents from European Parliamentary meetings and sessions. You can even see exactly which Parliamentarian voted what, on every single vote they have made, ever. So all meetings of the people who decide on the laws are very public. Lastly, the Council is partially transparent. While Council work is rather transparent the work of the European Council (the bosses of the national countries coming together for a chat) is the opposite of transparent. Minutes are never shared and are kept secret... Despite requests to change this, the leaders of the national governments prefer to keep it all behind closed doors...
Abandoned me The problem with EU is it failed to protect millions like me in UK who grew up as an EU citizen, never wanted a UK referendum in 2016, voted Remain, as forced to vote, and have had EU citizenship an rights ripped off me and nothing from EU to me in aid, or lifeboat. Nothing at all. 14 million or more British Remain voters just walked away from by EU as though we were nothing and are still nothing. Remember if EU can treat us British (Welsh) EU Remain voters with such disregard when we most needed EU protection… what about you in your EU country? Why would EU parliament, commission, courts etc not simply cast you away too, as inconvenient? I am one of the abandoned, I’m still an EU citizen in my head but I’ve been left as waste at the side of the road? Why?
Well you see here’s the thing the European Union is a Voluntary Union. If a country wants to leave, Like yours did, the wider members of the Union cannot drum up their armies and “Subjugate the Secessionists” that would be antithetical to what, supposedly, the EU is about. I know some of you folks want the EU to become a “Benevolent Empire” but the fact is that if the Union ignores the voice of millions more citizens in the UK after they Democratically voted to leave it would receive international backlash and be substantial fodder for Anti EU and EU skeptic organizations. Here is what you can do if you want to remain an EU citizen, which is your right, You could either move to Ireland, being a fellow Celt you should be received warmly there, or you can move to any EU state with established British enclaves residing within them. This way you can enjoy the wonders of the EU, be surrounded by folks with similar backgrounds and cultural ties, and not seem like a nut who wants a Confederation established to prevent European Wars to invade your former Country of origin.
You are right that you losing your EU citizenship without having voted for it, is quite terrible.. the EU as an institution has no power over this though.. the country that decides to leave speaks for the citizens.. the UK citizenship trumps the EU.. Most Europeans would have preferred the situation with the UK to have gone differently.. Many English and especially the majority of Scots and Welsh have been forced out against their will. Let’s hope we can welcome them back in the Union one day.. and have their rights restored.
What are your opinions of Serbia joining the Union? If i remember correctly we are given possible date of joining in year 2025 in Strategy for Western Balkans a year ago
Dear sirs on EU. I dont like to comment in comments however please sirs what story its THAT of a person put here life in the WEB? Got a idea. Why did we dont open the doors of the Banks and put a table say. Its all your be my guess please. What about sirs?
So they are the true all power bosses in the Union ? In a few limited areas, the Commission has the authority to adopt regulatory or technical legislation WITHOUT CONSULTING or OBTAINING the CONSENT of other bodies. The Commission can adopt legislation on its OWN initiative concerning monopolies and concessions granted to companies by Member States (Article 106(3) TFEU) and concerning the right of workers to remain in a Member State after having been employed there (Article 45(3)(d) TFEU). Two directives have been adopted using this procedure: one on transparency between member states and companies and another on competition in the telecommunications sector.... In 2010 the Commission was sued for blocking access to documents on EU biofuel policy.[89] This happened after media accused the Commission of blocking scientific evidence against biofuel subsidies.[90] Lack of transparency, unclear lobbyist relations, conflicts of interests and excessive spending of the Commission was highlighted in a number of reports by internal and independent auditing organisations. It has also been criticised on IT-related issues, particularly with regard to Microsoft.
Not really. Parliament can dissolve Commission anytime it wants, so if I should pick the most powerful body it would be the Parliament. EU works just like any other country. There are two types of laws - primary and secondary. Primary law contains norms and secondary law contains technical details of primary laws as you mentioned. In many countries secondary laws are adopted by governments or even ministeries without any consent from Parliament (decrees, gov. acts, government orders, ministry regulations and so on). EU uses many procedures for secondary laws, some need parliament consent, some don't, just like in many countries. However if you look at Eur-lex you will see 90% of EU's secondary law require at least Parliament consent, so even in this area EU is far more democratic than countries themselves. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_and_secondary_legislation
NO dude it doesnt work as other state. legislature is all in the Commissions hands. The parliament cant propose SHIT. So the CITIZENS cant elect anyone to propose shit sinc ethe COmmission is not elected. Also even if the PArliament would dissolve a Commission then WHAT? Another one will take its place and it will be another unelected one filled with the same people drafted from groups of interests...lbbies etc. IEU has been passing UNPOPULAR LAWS for decades all without telling the citizens. This is NOT democracy, this is technocracy. They think we are stupid plebs and they want to keep us in the dark. No more. Also saying "yes or no" to what they propose is NOT democracy. THats how things worked in Italy under Mussolini andin Germany under Hitler. IS THAT DEMOCRACY? SYAING YES OR NO TO WHAT THE BIG BROTHER ASKS? NO
@@Ciceroni1 No. I'm referring to something that is there for all to see. The Kalergi Plan is quite explicit in that it aims to rid Europe of white people by means of incessant waves of migration from Africa; so as to 'create a race more like the ancient Egyptians'. The EU is so enamoured by this scheme that it has a biennial award given to the person considered to have most furthered its aims. Past recipients of the award are Herbert von Rumpoy and Angela Merkel.
If you would be so kind to tell me where in his works he speaks about plans or intention to take action to rid Europe of white people. I recognise what you say about ‘a race more like the ancient Egyptians’, but the essence of what he argues there is crucially different. With regard to the award, are you referring to the Charlemagne prize? Because that is for efforts toward European unification, not related to ‘ridding Europe of white people’. In that light giving Van Rompuy and Merkel the prize doesn’t seem strange at all. Neither do the other recipients. Also it is not an EU prize ;)
@@Ciceroni1 “The (European) man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will disappear owing to the disappearing of space (nations), time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its outward appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals” Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi - Praktischer Idealismus The essence of what is said is plain to see. Add to this the Barcelona Declaration and the Marrakech Declaration and we can see where we are going.
Yes the essence is indeed plain to see, even more so if you take in account the rest of the text and ideas put forward by Coudenhove-Kalergi. It is not a 'plan' or his goal to bring more people to Europe to destroy the white people, it is more of a prediction what will happen due to the disappearance of space, time, and prejudice. If we follow your logic the fact that Stephen Hawking said AI will lead to “a new form of life that will outperform humans”, we must assume he was scheming to create such a new form of life and a secret society is still working on it as we speak. Or maybe was it simply a prediction as a scientist?
The whole idea that an unelected commision has the right to propose laws while the MEPs only have the authority to rubberstamp them makes the EU little more, than a peoples republic.
Yeah this is a democratic deficit and something that needs to be fixed. A peoples’ republic is a bit too far though;) there are national parliaments and the EP that need to agree to all the legislation.
How do you mean? The video explains how the president and the other commissioners are appointed. Is there something unclear about that? Or do you mean all the other people working in the Commission?
People say the European Commission is very undemocratic which is true, but I think a big problem with democratising the Commission is that many people would still vote based on their own (national) interest, which would defeat the purpose of the Commission when it's one of the only institutions meant to solely work in the interest of the European Union as a whole. While obviously democracy is preferable, I wonder if the European Union would have been able to achieve as much as it has if it weren't for its flawed system.
True. The question also is whether the commission needs to be democratic. Most countries don’t directly elect the heads of ministries. In many it is completely decided behind closed doors. This we all find normal, yet with the commission we see it as a problem. It’s interesting isn’t it?
Jami Rahkonen isn't it weird that I didn't know Spanish politicians where there. I also don't remember voting them to be there. What an odd take on democracy..
Danny Morgan. I don't know about Spain but at least here in Finland the basics of how EU works were taught to us in secondary or highschool. And at least I remember that there have been elections to elect people to the European parlament. Those people then decide who gets to be in the comission
In my opinion, no it is not democratic enough. The Spitzenkandidat system makes it more democratic since we kind of know who the candidates for the presidency are, but it is not a formalised system yet (European Council could still put forward another candidate which would result in a clash between the European Council and Parliament). So I would be in favour of a formalised indirectly elected head of the Commission and possibly a directly elected ceremonial president of the EU. What about you?
@@Ciceroni1 I would be in favour a completely democratic EU. I do not like the fact it is not. How can the EU say it is a beacon for democracy if people get roles of enormous power without any people choice or any accountability?
I don’t think I said it is a beacon, did I? Nonetheless, the EU, or Europe, is a beacon of sorts when it comes to democracy. With all the flaws in our democracies, we still have fairer systems than most of the world. I think it is important to keep that in mind. Strive for a better system and address the flaws, but realise and cherish what we have now instead of dismissing it for not being perfect.
To be honest I find it difficult to see for sure on the map, but it seems like you might be right. In our (not very good) defence, we borrowed the map from the Commission itself, I believe. Anyway, thanks for pointing it out :)
No problem! My university recently held a conference by the embassador Pelayo Castro about the EU anniversary, was nice to see a little bit upclose the dyanmics of it and your video does an amazing job summarizing it.
It's pretty unusual in most countries that laws not supported by the executive branch pass. In America, the president has a rather strong veto. In the UK, the majority that can pass a law is also the majority that can dismiss the prime minister and install one, so it only tends to be a backbench revolt that might pass a law over the head of the executive, or a minority government where at least some of the parties propping up the government betray them on some of the issues. It's pretty unclear as to how much this would end up empowering the European Parliament given that the EP can also petition the EC to create a report on whether a concept for a proposed law would be good and it would weird of the EC to not suggest a law it's staff find would be beneficial, and the EP is divided into a lot of parties and any bill would have to pass the Council too, which involves a lot more negotiation. It probably is a useful thing to add to the powers of the EP and the Council but it's not a major problem.
Hi! Great video! There's just one map where all the countries' words for "no" are given, and Ireland is represented by "aon". "Aon" means "one" in Irish! You should put in "níl", if you redo the video.
Thank you! We've messed up a few translations in that shot. Unfortunately, it's impossible to change anything after the video is up.. If we ever do a remake, we'll do it right :)
@@Ciceroni1 It's a great video. Here is a list of 'yes and no' in European languages: www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/07/how-do-you-say-yes-and-no-in-europes-24-official-languages/ Your English accent is amazing 😀
The fact that the citizens of Europe hardly know the people on the commission, or what they do, is not great either. (Regardless of what you think about what the commission has done so far)
@Mario If France elects Le Pen she will make the choice to stay within the EU. Her friends and family are too invested in the well being of the EU to reject it. She follows her daddy only in lies about willing to be nationalist and to close borders.
@Mario And I'm not versed enough in the representatives at the EU but I highly doubt that they are communists. They wouldn't pass such liberal laws and ask for so many economic treaties. But I agree with you, if UK does well after the Brexit, the peoples of Europe will ask to leave the EU. I also agree with you that Germany gives directions to the EU.
@Mario The UK didn't have laws making that kind of crossing illegal and they could have stayed in the EU and been able to keep that. Dutch law has a rule with regards to red lights but not anywhere else but a crossing, pedestrians just don't have priority outside a zebra. As for Le Pen, France gave her 21.3% in the first round, where most people are voting for their most preferred party, and 33.9% in the second, and French presidents have no authority to change French laws and the parliament, in particular that Senate, can be quite reluctant to give presidents what they want. And almost all French presidents face a sharp drop in their popularity and none since 2002 have been reelected, so politicians tying themselves to her would be a big gamble. In addition, the French executive government deals a lot with the EU, the president only to a degree, so trying to implement anything like Brexit will be extremely hard. Her election was also at a high time of popularity for Brexit, Donald Trump, and similar figures around the world. Britain has shown was can go wrong with the process. I doubt France would have as much support.
I think it should be investigated if the European Union now and then is legislated with the Bible written as a story. The word immunity (Latin immunitas, freedom from obligations to the state) comes from a religious revelation from the middle ages, most likely from a pope to become lawless, and which has since been rewritten into full immunity, personal and functional immunity (legally, cannot be prosecuted for criminal act) to the kings (head of state), presidents, and prime ministers, for law decisions and actions. The political exploitation of the vital ecosystem has now led to forest death (force majeure) and how will it affect people's economy, etc.
This video is meant to be neutral, we try to give an overview of the fact. Be sure to watch our other videos, the Commission is by far the least democratic of the three main institutions (which is to be expected from the executive).
@@Ciceroni1 Loved the video! Helping me a lot with my European Studies courses! But what do you mean that executives are expected to be the least democratic?
ai... well I wasn't careful enough with Google translate I guess. Thanks for correcting it and next time if we have to translate something to Danish we'll be sure to ask you ;)
@@Ciceroni1 "Ingen" can be translated as "no", but in the same way as German "kein" or Dutch "geen" (I believe you speak one of those), e.g "I have no car". Google translate was right, you just didn't pick the correct translation option ;)
You do realise that it is a total of 23.000 civil servants for the entire EU, with a population for more than 500 million. In comparison, the UK with a population of 68 million has 430.075 civil servants. So 23.000 does not seem so much, right?
@@Ciceroni1 Considering the commision and administration is just a bunch of paper pushers that tell the member states what to do, and occasionally sues, 23.000 is a lot.
Well if they were actually telling all Member States what to do, I would be seriously impressed with only 23.000. Imagine that. 23.000 civil servants in Brussels planning and ordering all Member States (and millions of national and local civil servants) what to do. Rather impressive. But no, that is not the case. I think 23.000 civil servants is not a lot if looking at the large numbers of complex subjects that they are working on or compared to national civil servants.
+Ciceroni You said the comission are the ones to dragt laws, not the ruling party of the EP. They hold positions equal to ministers. Executive positions. They have no business meddling in legislature. That is liberal democracy 101.
Actually it is not that uncommon for the executive branch to also have the right of initiative or for the executive to draft proposals based on requests from for example a parliament. Anyway, you might be relieved to hear that most laws drafted by the Commission are not on its own initiative. I can't find a statistic from the last few years now, but I believe only around 20% of drafts are on initiative of the Commission itself (of course the number of initiatives is not the greatest measure, since that does not show the impact of the proposed laws but it is some indication). Also, regardless of how common it is and how much use the Commission makes of it, it might also be a relieve for you to hear that while the Commission can propose new laws, it cannot bring them into effect without the explicit consent of the Council and Parliament (NB Parliament sometimes only has an advisory role).
+Ciceroni That is indeed a relief. It is also sloghtly dishartening, considering the bumber of laws passed that were clearly constructed as tools of economic warfare against states within the union. It was appearently not the fault of beurocratic overeach, but a disfunctional parlaiment.
Which laws are you talking about exactly? And you have to keep in mind, that Parliament has not always had the same power it does now. If a law was introduced before the increase in power, it would be unfair to blame them. On top of that, even now there still is plenty of room for improvement!
This was the composition of the Commission when we made the video. So indeed, at that time only 9 out of 28 Commissioners were women... This time there are 11 female Commissioners and the president is a women, so improvement for women :)
@@리주민 It's obvious that any given society has about the same number of men and women. Not obvious what percentage of ethnicities you should expect to typically see.
These guys should be directly elected but still have to do what's best for the whole EU, that'd probably require a cultural shift on the ground first though
Well it mostly comes down to the President being elected by the EU Parliment thing, but I do agree that it would be helpful if some of the Comissioners were already members of the EU Parliment along with the President.
Commission President is indirectly elected, just like any Prime minister. Direct election French people > Macron Indirect election Americans > Electors > US President Europeans > MEPs > Commission President > MPs > Prime Ministers It's not really that different from direct election. US electors pledge to vote for this or that President, while European MPs/MEPs pledge to vote one or other candidate ("Spitzenkandidat" ~ Lead candidate) during campaigns. Disadvantage is one extra step in the election process. But advantage is the Commission President or Prime ministers have support of Parliaments and there's no conflict between legislature and executives all the time.
Haebris I disagree. Commissioners are meant to be experts in their field. For example, nearly all national Ministers come to their position the same way as Commissioners. Prime Minister/Commission President is elected by Parliament. They then choose a government (Ministers/Commissioners) which must then be approved as a while by the Queen/Parliament. (Queen for UK only)
I would like to see the EU using semi-presidential system just like France. The problem is most of people don't understand the system as it is now, semi-presidential is even more complicated.
@@jameslincs With one of the most rigorous recruiting processes, getting a job at one of the top institutions is remarkably tough. The institution is far from universally loved, but the feat of getting a job there is unquestionably remarkable, and certainly something a child to said parent could be proud of.
@@Ciceroni1 To start with, I simply voted against the e.u by referendum. Referendum not respected...not very democratic.. a VERY BAD START...beside elected among themselves by themselves, von der leyen and her croonies represent no one but themselves. German e.u made in usa was supposed to maintain peace...see the war...technocrat globalist europeist like macron standing to orders! Shameful traitor, meanwhile, ,impoverishing French peoples to the benefits of others., destroying French Sovereignty, privileging migrants over born and breed frenchies...macron/von der leyen/usa impose the woke bullshit and the cancel culture. Nothing good happens for my country with the dreaded hegemonic e.u...and now von der leyen wants a e.u army?! want the nuclear french force? a sit in nato? an e.u army? Von der leyen is a danger, a threat to the world. Believe me there is much to be said about the dread e.u brings to les Francais and others members of that merchant club FREXIT.
Emphasizing the European flag of an agreement between Greece and Macedonia gives and opens a right in the EU states so that larger ethnicities demand the sharing and exit and busting of those EU states. What means that; - In Germany, there are more than 10 million Turks who with this agreement have the right to seek their own province and proclaim their Turkish territory! In Sweden Same people, In Belgium Walloon! In Italy Sicilians! In Spain, the Basques! In England Wales, Scotland etc ... Let's now EU ratify it.
How could anyone support such an undemocratic system. The European Union is technocracy gone off the rails. The fact that this joke of a government has any voice in actually democratic institutions is terrifying
is terrifying that you dont understand English. EU is democratic, watch the video again, and working toward EU country and army. Take your brexiter ignorance back in your Little Britain.. normal EU citizens are molested by brexiter lunatics .Destroy your country, EU try to help and get criticized.. my opinion: let the UK with no deal and in 10 years they will come back as a poor third world country.
idiot. i living in former fascist ,right-wing state, now democratic Spain.. so what you saying : Marxism is nonexistent , nowhere on Earth.. history moved forward, but UK still going backward.. your reaction is one example.
Zokll Ehbfd your so ignorant of how true democracy really works that you don’t even know what true freedom is. Poor mindless sheep. I feel sorry for you
hahahah Spain is not free or democratic ? heheheh don´t feel sorry for me or us, we, EU citizens are fine and prosperous... We feel sorry for Little Britain, where voters are manipulated, ignorants , uneducated, under false democracy (just for TV shows).. UK is former 5th, 6th or now 7th ?? economy in the world, and sinking... So, first look in your backward country(just England, the others will separate) then criticize others...
0:20 UPDATED INFO: The College of Commissioners is composed of the President of the Commission, eight Vice-Presidents, including three Executive Vice-Presidents, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and 18 Commissioners, each responsible for a portfolio.
Holy smokes, I just saw the light! Thank you so much, everything suddenly makes so much more sense!!
Thanks! We can't make it sexy but at least try to make it somewhat understandable 😂
Great videos about how the EU works! Really appreciated it and will share to friends so they will wont forget to vote in the elections!! :) Keep up the good work!
Thanks for this simple explanation.
Otherwise, it's very cumbersome to interpret the functioning of different institutions within the EU.
Correction to: "Like MEPs, Commissioners are not expected to work for the interests of their member states." In fact, MEPs represent the people in their member states who directly elected them. So they do work for the interests of their member states. The only legislative body in the European Union that represents the interests of the European Union itself is the European Commission -- it is important to note that both the Council of the EU, the European Parliament, and the European Commission work for the interests of three different groups as that is a part of the democratic "checks and balances" of the EU system.
You’re mostly right, but you miss our point. MEPs indeed represents the people that directly elected them and the three main institutions indeed each represent another actor (the people, the EU, the Member States). This is exactly the point: an MEP, like a Commissioner, is not expected to represent his/her home member state (that’s the Council’s job). Rather an MEP represents the citizens that voted for him/her. MEPs from the same country might have very conflicting interests and vote differently. In a system where MEPs would have to work for the interests of their member state, they would all vote along with their Ministers in the Council.
"Rather an MEP represents the citizens that voted for him/her." Exactly. We agree, then, and I can accept the wording. :-)
I'm glad! thanks for your critical opinion!:)
+Stylus Phantasticus The EU takes Montesquieu's principles to a whole new lever, whereas most nations opt to divide the power into 3-2 branches, the EU divides into 5.
In that case, who does the European Council represent? Isn't that also the individual member states?
you sound lowkey dutch
Quite a bit more than low-key :P
what?! where do you get that from?
Watched one video, I subscribed! You are awesome!
Amazing channel! Glad I found it.
Very useful educational videos :D Love your channel!
Thanks :)
This is better then any kind of drama show
Wait...
Who is the one who proposes the president to the parlment?
"The European Council" or "The Council of The European Union"?
The European Council does. I see I made a mistake in the annotation/link (confusing with the same logo :P ), thanks for pointing that out, I corrected it now.
What is this a conspiracy
“EU caliphate”? Tell me more!!
What have you been watching? and is this a joke or not?
Actually thinking about it a little more believable if you watch Paul Joseph Watson
Thank you for this video!
Amazing videos. Thanks a lot for making these
This is extremely helpful, but could you please clarify the Commission's election process? When a candidate for the Presidency of the European Commission is proposed by the European Council, is 'unanimity' required among European council members for this proposition to be forwarded to the European Parliament.
Additionally, when a candidate is proposed by the European Council to be elected as the President of the Commission, does this mean they are the sole candidate name on the ballot paper for European Parliamentarians to approve or reject?
Many thanks.
Moreover, has there ever been a scenario in which the European Parliament has rejected the European Council's proposed candidate for the Presidency of the Commission? Or has it ever rejected any of the 27 political appointees of the Commission President?
Hi Sam,
The Council’s candidate for President of the Commission is decided by qualified majority, not unanimity. And yes, the Council proposes a single candidate to Parliament to reject or approve. If rejected, the Council will propose a new candidate to the European Parliament within a month (You can find the official texts for this in: TEU Article 17:7).
To the best of our knowledge, the EP has never rejected a President of the Commission. However, it did force the resignation of the Santer Commission in 1999 (EP had confirmed the Santer Commission in 1995 though).
Regarding a single Commissioner: Officially the European Parliament may only reject or accept the Commission as a whole, so strictly speaking it has never rejected a single Commissioner. On (at least) two occasions it did, however, threaten to reject the proposed Commission if a single Commissioner was not replaced (which basically means they rejected that individual Commissioner). Rocco Buttiglione in 2004 and Alenka Bratusek in 2014. These two cases, in particular the Buttiglione affair, are prime examples for the EP assuming more power and influence.
Thank you very much for your response. Hypothetically, If the European Parliament voted to reject the European Council's proposed Commission, would the entire proposed College of Commissioners have to be replaced? Or would the EP specify which Commissioners it disapproved of?
If the College of Commissioners is accepted or rejected by Parliament collectively, then does this mean the President appoints his/her cabinet/college of Commissioners before he/she is approved by Parliament themselves? In other words, do they decide who will be in their Commission cabinet after they are proposed as candidates for the commission presidency by the Council, but before they are approved of by the Parliament?
Moreover, does the Parliament use the voting mechanism of an 'absolute majority' to approve of a proposed college of commissioners?
Thanks
To get a better feel of how the process works, it might be interesting to read en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barroso_Commission (heading ‘Commissioner hearings’). It gives you a better idea of the process and shows its more of a negotiation where the proposed Commission can be changed to convince Parliament to give its consent. Here MEPs made clear which Commissioners they disapproved of in the proposed Commission and why.
No, the President is elected first (before the Lisbon treaty Parliament only gave consent). After the candidate has been elected by Parliament, he/she as the President-elect adopts a list of Commissioners with the Council. Parliament then gives its consent for the body as a whole (President, High Representative and the other Commissioners).
Yes, consent for the proposed Commission is given by absolute majority.
I kind of miss any mention of Spitzenkandidat in the election process of the Commission President. What is described in the video really feels more like Barroso era.
Thanks for this it really helped to my midterm :)
Amazing videol! interesting.
Thank you very much for this, very well put. My own question on the whole idea of the EU is this: Why do we need a "United States of Europe"? Why do individual countries NEED to be controlled by a huge army of "politicians" . The real purpose of the EU should be simply to oversee a smooth transition of trade between each member. NO MORE, NO LESS! Anything else is quite rightly viewed with suspicion .
That much is true as long as you only think about internal trade. However, on a global scale some form of government is needed to pursue ones interests. Right now, our foreign policy is to a notable amount being dictated by the US (which seems to be slowly ceding that influence to China). This also affects our trade.
To give one example: looking at current news, it is fairly possible that the US might sanction European companies in Cuba. As a consequence, the EU needs to defend its own interests and that is only possible with a government that has some weight in its negotiation. How centralized this government should be and how exactly it should work, might still be a relevant question though.
So politburo elects Kim il Juncker, our great leader, as rtl/sbs/bbc Pravda explain how benevolent our great leaders of the european empire need to
create an european army. I believe they are no ordinary men but rule by devine right. All hail the new order.
Do you really think news channels are positive about the Commissioners? My experience is that national media are rather critical and negative towards EU officials.
While I'm not a fan of Junker (he is a conservative and started negotiating TTIP), I do like how he slanders authoritarians to their face and slaps them instead of cowering down to them
@@Ciceroni1
We need more news reporters like this:
m.ruclips.net/video/70o6xDfGpe8/видео.html
Thanks so much for these videos!
You’re very welcome. Glad you like them!
So the meetings from the people who make the laws for every person in the EU are NOT for the public?!
Depends on how you see it. You have the people who do a lot of the work (the civil servants) and the people who decide on what will become a law (the Parliament and Council). The people working at the Commission are civil servants. Just like with any other national government (or normal office) minutes are not made and published of all meetings they have. Their final proposals and supporting documents are though. In that sense the EU Commission is probably more transparent than most national governments (even though their websites are not always the most user friendly, but then again, which government website is...). As for the European Parliament, the EU is actually incredibly transparent. On their website (same issue with friendliness) you can find agenda's, minutes and all sorts of other documents from European Parliamentary meetings and sessions. You can even see exactly which Parliamentarian voted what, on every single vote they have made, ever. So all meetings of the people who decide on the laws are very public.
Lastly, the Council is partially transparent. While Council work is rather transparent the work of the European Council (the bosses of the national countries coming together for a chat) is the opposite of transparent. Minutes are never shared and are kept secret... Despite requests to change this, the leaders of the national governments prefer to keep it all behind closed doors...
Abandoned me
The problem with EU is it failed to protect millions like me in UK who grew up as an EU citizen, never wanted a UK referendum in 2016, voted Remain, as forced to vote, and have had EU citizenship an rights ripped off me and nothing from EU to me in aid, or lifeboat. Nothing at all. 14 million or more British Remain voters just walked away from by EU as though we were nothing and are still nothing.
Remember if EU can treat us British (Welsh) EU Remain voters with such disregard when we most needed EU protection… what about you in your EU country? Why would EU parliament, commission, courts etc not simply cast you away too, as inconvenient?
I am one of the abandoned, I’m still an EU citizen in my head but I’ve been left as waste at the side of the road?
Why?
Well you see here’s the thing the European Union is a Voluntary Union. If a country wants to leave, Like yours did, the wider members of the Union cannot drum up their armies and “Subjugate the Secessionists” that would be antithetical to what, supposedly, the EU is about. I know some of you folks want the EU to become a “Benevolent Empire” but the fact is that if the Union ignores the voice of millions more citizens in the UK after they Democratically voted to leave it would receive international backlash and be substantial fodder for Anti EU and EU skeptic organizations. Here is what you can do if you want to remain an EU citizen, which is your right, You could either move to Ireland, being a fellow Celt you should be received warmly there, or you can move to any EU state with established British enclaves residing within them. This way you can enjoy the wonders of the EU, be surrounded by folks with similar backgrounds and cultural ties, and not seem like a nut who wants a Confederation established to prevent European Wars to invade your former Country of origin.
You are right that you losing your EU citizenship without having voted for it, is quite terrible.. the EU as an institution has no power over this though.. the country that decides to leave speaks for the citizens.. the UK citizenship trumps the EU.. Most Europeans would have preferred the situation with the UK to have gone differently..
Many English and especially the majority of Scots and Welsh have been forced out against their will. Let’s hope we can welcome them back in the Union one day.. and have their rights restored.
Thanks for making this. Interesting
So the central executive body has no democratic mandate at all. 🤔
Small correction, κανένα means nothing in Greek, όχι would be the correct word for No.
Cheers! Our Greek is not quite up to scratch but we'll work on it! :)
my teachr worked here said it was fun and extreamly intresting
Small correction. No in Maltese is "LE" not "EBDA" :)
What are your opinions of Serbia joining the Union? If i remember correctly we are given possible date of joining in year 2025 in Strategy for Western Balkans a year ago
Personally I think other countries can join as long as they fulfil the necessary requirements. What do you think?
Dear sirs on EU. I dont like to comment in comments however please sirs what story its THAT of a person put here life in the WEB? Got a idea. Why did we dont open the doors of the Banks and put a table say. Its all your be my guess please. What about sirs?
So they are the true all power bosses in the Union ? In a few limited areas, the Commission has the authority to adopt regulatory or technical legislation WITHOUT CONSULTING or OBTAINING the CONSENT of other bodies. The Commission can adopt legislation on its OWN initiative concerning monopolies and concessions granted to companies by Member States (Article 106(3) TFEU) and concerning the right of workers to remain in a Member State after having been employed there (Article 45(3)(d) TFEU). Two directives have been adopted using this procedure: one on transparency between member states and companies and another on competition in the telecommunications sector.... In 2010 the Commission was sued for blocking access to documents on EU biofuel policy.[89] This happened after media accused the Commission of blocking scientific evidence against biofuel subsidies.[90] Lack of transparency, unclear lobbyist relations, conflicts of interests and excessive spending of the Commission was highlighted in a number of reports by internal and independent auditing organisations. It has also been criticised on IT-related issues, particularly with regard to Microsoft.
Not really. Parliament can dissolve Commission anytime it wants, so if I should pick the most powerful body it would be the Parliament.
EU works just like any other country. There are two types of laws - primary and secondary. Primary law contains norms and secondary law contains technical details of primary laws as you mentioned. In many countries secondary laws are adopted by governments or even ministeries without any consent from Parliament (decrees, gov. acts, government orders, ministry regulations and so on). EU uses many procedures for secondary laws, some need parliament consent, some don't, just like in many countries. However if you look at Eur-lex you will see 90% of EU's secondary law require at least Parliament consent, so even in this area EU is far more democratic than countries themselves.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_and_secondary_legislation
NO dude it doesnt work as other state. legislature is all in the Commissions hands. The parliament cant propose SHIT. So the CITIZENS cant elect anyone to propose shit sinc ethe COmmission is not elected.
Also even if the PArliament would dissolve a Commission then WHAT? Another one will take its place and it will be another unelected one filled with the same people drafted from groups of interests...lbbies etc.
IEU has been passing UNPOPULAR LAWS for decades all without telling the citizens. This is NOT democracy, this is technocracy. They think we are stupid plebs and they want to keep us in the dark.
No more.
Also saying "yes or no" to what they propose is NOT democracy. THats how things worked in Italy under Mussolini andin Germany under Hitler.
IS THAT DEMOCRACY? SYAING YES OR NO TO WHAT THE BIG BROTHER ASKS?
NO
@notfurthesecund No, I'm just a critically thinking person and if I see lies I will fact check them and people seem to like it.
How's that Kalergi Plan coming along?
Haha well parts of his ideas seem to be realised. Although I think you are referring to conspiracy theory stuff. Am I right?
@@Ciceroni1
No. I'm referring to something that is there for all to see. The Kalergi Plan is quite explicit in that it aims to rid Europe of white people by means of incessant waves of migration from Africa; so as to 'create a race more like the ancient Egyptians'.
The EU is so enamoured by this scheme that it has a biennial award given to the person considered to have most furthered its aims. Past recipients of the award are Herbert von Rumpoy and Angela Merkel.
If you would be so kind to tell me where in his works he speaks about plans or intention to take action to rid Europe of white people. I recognise what you say about ‘a race more like the ancient Egyptians’, but the essence of what he argues there is crucially different.
With regard to the award, are you referring to the Charlemagne prize? Because that is for efforts toward European unification, not related to ‘ridding Europe of white people’. In that light giving Van Rompuy and Merkel the prize doesn’t seem strange at all. Neither do the other recipients. Also it is not an EU prize ;)
@@Ciceroni1
“The (European) man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will disappear owing to the disappearing of space (nations), time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its outward appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals”
Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi - Praktischer Idealismus
The essence of what is said is plain to see.
Add to this the Barcelona Declaration and the Marrakech Declaration and we can see where we are going.
Yes the essence is indeed plain to see, even more so if you take in account the rest of the text and ideas put forward by Coudenhove-Kalergi. It is not a 'plan' or his goal to bring more people to Europe to destroy the white people, it is more of a prediction what will happen due to the disappearance of space, time, and prejudice.
If we follow your logic the fact that Stephen Hawking said AI will lead to “a new form of life that will outperform humans”, we must assume he was scheming to create such a new form of life and a secret society is still working on it as we speak. Or maybe was it simply a prediction as a scientist?
The whole idea that an unelected commision has the right to propose laws while the MEPs only have the authority to rubberstamp them makes the EU little more, than a peoples republic.
Yeah this is a democratic deficit and something that needs to be fixed.
A peoples’ republic is a bit too far though;) there are national parliaments and the EP that need to agree to all the legislation.
Ode to Joy (Anthem of EU) plays in the background
all you best
Thanks!
How do you get in the european commision?
How do you mean? The video explains how the president and the other commissioners are appointed. Is there something unclear about that? Or do you mean all the other people working in the Commission?
if you kiss enough arses and are corrupt enough anything is possible.
To get to the top, you have to kiss a lot of the bottom 🍑
Thank you my guy
People say the European Commission is very undemocratic which is true, but I think a big problem with democratising the Commission is that many people would still vote based on their own (national) interest, which would defeat the purpose of the Commission when it's one of the only institutions meant to solely work in the interest of the European Union as a whole.
While obviously democracy is preferable, I wonder if the European Union would have been able to achieve as much as it has if it weren't for its flawed system.
True. The question also is whether the commission needs to be democratic. Most countries don’t directly elect the heads of ministries. In many it is completely decided behind closed doors. This we all find normal, yet with the commission we see it as a problem. It’s interesting isn’t it?
Who are these people? And why do they speak for me?
Danny Morgan. I think they are mostly politicians. Like for example Finland's represenetive is our former primeminister.
Jami Rahkonen why does a ex-finnish priminister speak for people in Spain? How does that make sense? I didn't vote for this...
Danny Morgan. There is also some politician from Spain there. Just like from every other EU country.
Jami Rahkonen isn't it weird that I didn't know Spanish politicians where there. I also don't remember voting them to be there. What an odd take on democracy..
Danny Morgan. I don't know about Spain but at least here in Finland the basics of how EU works were taught to us in secondary or highschool. And at least I remember that there have been elections to elect people to the European parlament. Those people then decide who gets to be in the comission
Do you regard the choice of President as being fully democratic?
In my opinion, no it is not democratic enough. The Spitzenkandidat system makes it more democratic since we kind of know who the candidates for the presidency are, but it is not a formalised system yet (European Council could still put forward another candidate which would result in a clash between the European Council and Parliament). So I would be in favour of a formalised indirectly elected head of the Commission and possibly a directly elected ceremonial president of the EU. What about you?
@@Ciceroni1 I would be in favour a completely democratic EU. I do not like the fact it is not. How can the EU say it is a beacon for democracy if people get roles of enormous power without any people choice or any accountability?
I don’t think I said it is a beacon, did I? Nonetheless, the EU, or Europe, is a beacon of sorts when it comes to democracy. With all the flaws in our democracies, we still have fairer systems than most of the world. I think it is important to keep that in mind. Strive for a better system and address the flaws, but realise and cherish what we have now instead of dismissing it for not being perfect.
@@Ciceroni1 i
I never said you said it was a beacon. I said the EU says it is a beacon.
Ah sorry, I read it wrong :P Anyway, then the rest of my previous answer applies :)
Todabia lo espero
There is reprentation in Costa Rica, apparently you forgot to include it in your map
To be honest I find it difficult to see for sure on the map, but it seems like you might be right. In our (not very good) defence, we borrowed the map from the Commission itself, I believe. Anyway, thanks for pointing it out :)
No problem! My university recently held a conference by the embassador Pelayo Castro about the EU anniversary, was nice to see a little bit upclose the dyanmics of it and your video does an amazing job summarizing it.
Thanks, nice to hear! Check out our other videos for other information, maybe you’ll like those as well;)
SO WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS HOW DO THE COMMISSIONER'S LIVE LIKE KINGS AND QUEENS WHILE THE COMMON MAN WOMAN LIVE ON BARELY LIVABLE WAGES .
They do make a rather large salary compared to some other political leaders. How much do you think they should make?
2:13 - How undemocratic!!
It's pretty unusual in most countries that laws not supported by the executive branch pass. In America, the president has a rather strong veto. In the UK, the majority that can pass a law is also the majority that can dismiss the prime minister and install one, so it only tends to be a backbench revolt that might pass a law over the head of the executive, or a minority government where at least some of the parties propping up the government betray them on some of the issues. It's pretty unclear as to how much this would end up empowering the European Parliament given that the EP can also petition the EC to create a report on whether a concept for a proposed law would be good and it would weird of the EC to not suggest a law it's staff find would be beneficial, and the EP is divided into a lot of parties and any bill would have to pass the Council too, which involves a lot more negotiation.
It probably is a useful thing to add to the powers of the EP and the Council but it's not a major problem.
Election results must've been good and welcome and fair enough to let love lead to complete work divine
Hi! Great video! There's just one map where all the countries' words for "no" are given, and Ireland is represented by "aon". "Aon" means "one" in Irish! You should put in "níl", if you redo the video.
Thank you! We've messed up a few translations in that shot. Unfortunately, it's impossible to change anything after the video is up.. If we ever do a remake, we'll do it right :)
@@Ciceroni1 'No' in Greek is 'Όχι'.
@@pneron2032 Thanks. One day we'll remake it maybe :)
@@Ciceroni1 It's a great video. Here is a list of 'yes and no' in European languages: www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/07/how-do-you-say-yes-and-no-in-europes-24-official-languages/ Your English accent is amazing 😀
Aon also means any
the eu commission being the closest thing to an eu government is worrying
The fact that the citizens of Europe hardly know the people on the commission, or what they do, is not great either. (Regardless of what you think about what the commission has done so far)
@Mario If France elects Le Pen she will make the choice to stay within the EU. Her friends and family are too invested in the well being of the EU to reject it. She follows her daddy only in lies about willing to be nationalist and to close borders.
@Mario And I'm not versed enough in the representatives at the EU but I highly doubt that they are communists. They wouldn't pass such liberal laws and ask for so many economic treaties. But I agree with you, if UK does well after the Brexit, the peoples of Europe will ask to leave the EU. I also agree with you that Germany gives directions to the EU.
@Mario The UK didn't have laws making that kind of crossing illegal and they could have stayed in the EU and been able to keep that. Dutch law has a rule with regards to red lights but not anywhere else but a crossing, pedestrians just don't have priority outside a zebra.
As for Le Pen, France gave her 21.3% in the first round, where most people are voting for their most preferred party, and 33.9% in the second, and French presidents have no authority to change French laws and the parliament, in particular that Senate, can be quite reluctant to give presidents what they want. And almost all French presidents face a sharp drop in their popularity and none since 2002 have been reelected, so politicians tying themselves to her would be a big gamble.
In addition, the French executive government deals a lot with the EU, the president only to a degree, so trying to implement anything like Brexit will be extremely hard.
Her election was also at a high time of popularity for Brexit, Donald Trump, and similar figures around the world. Britain has shown was can go wrong with the process. I doubt France would have as much support.
I think it should be investigated if the European Union now and then is legislated with the Bible written as a story. The word immunity (Latin immunitas, freedom from obligations to the state) comes from a religious revelation from the middle ages, most likely from a pope to become lawless, and which has since been rewritten into full immunity, personal and functional immunity (legally, cannot be prosecuted for criminal act) to the kings (head of state), presidents, and prime ministers, for law decisions and actions. The political exploitation of the vital ecosystem has now led to forest death (force majeure) and how will it affect people's economy, etc.
What are you talking about...?
I assume this video is pro EU. But after listening it, the EU seems very undemocratic.
This video is meant to be neutral, we try to give an overview of the fact. Be sure to watch our other videos, the Commission is by far the least democratic of the three main institutions (which is to be expected from the executive).
@@Ciceroni1 Loved the video! Helping me a lot with my European Studies courses! But what do you mean that executives are expected to be the least democratic?
32,000 staff members*
Thanks for spotting this! We never did and neither did anybody else...
That's the same amount as the ministry for administrative affairs. Sir Humphrey, do something.
bro.. "ingen" does not mean no in danish.. nej means no lololol.. Ingen means nobody
ai... well I wasn't careful enough with Google translate I guess. Thanks for correcting it and next time if we have to translate something to Danish we'll be sure to ask you ;)
@@Ciceroni1 "Ingen" can be translated as "no", but in the same way as German "kein" or Dutch "geen" (I believe you speak one of those), e.g "I have no car". Google translate was right, you just didn't pick the correct translation option ;)
@@willzyxOfficial Well that is how they get you :P Thanks for enlightening me :)
@@Ciceroni1 Same for Maltese too. You used Ebda for no but ebda means none. The word for no is Le.
Thanks for pointing it out, we'll try to do better next time. Sadly we are not fluent in all languages of the EU, so Google Translate had to do :P
Member International Court of justice
their is a British Documentary called "The Real Face of the European Union" very enlightening Documentary Indeed
why pay thousand dollar colleges, like me when you can watch a free video on youtube.
Happy to help (for free):)
Similar to civil service
Yes it is:)
23,000 what a Scam, current issues to make each Country as Poor as is Humanly possible
You do realise that it is a total of 23.000 civil servants for the entire EU, with a population for more than 500 million. In comparison, the UK with a population of 68 million has 430.075 civil servants. So 23.000 does not seem so much, right?
@@Ciceroni1 Considering the commision and administration is just a bunch of paper pushers that tell the member states what to do, and occasionally sues, 23.000 is a lot.
Well if they were actually telling all Member States what to do, I would be seriously impressed with only 23.000. Imagine that. 23.000 civil servants in Brussels planning and ordering all Member States (and millions of national and local civil servants) what to do. Rather impressive.
But no, that is not the case. I think 23.000 civil servants is not a lot if looking at the large numbers of complex subjects that they are working on or compared to national civil servants.
@@Ciceroni1 oh, snap 😁
S.O.S. TO THE VENEZUELANS BECAUSE OF THE MATURE DICTATOR ..... WE DO NOT HAVE LIGHT, WATER OR FOOD .......... PLEASE HELP ..........!
stfu
This is a carbon copy of the USSR.. Look how that ended.
With that many commissioners there should be no crime (police joke).
Why the fuck are what amount to ministers making what equal laws? That is the exact sort of thing that should be the role of the parlainment.
I'm sorry, I don't understand your question. Could you rephrase it? We'd be happy to answer :)
+Ciceroni You said the comission are the ones to dragt laws, not the ruling party of the EP.
They hold positions equal to ministers. Executive positions. They have no business meddling in legislature.
That is liberal democracy 101.
Actually it is not that uncommon for the executive branch to also have the right of initiative or for the executive to draft proposals based on requests from for example a parliament. Anyway, you might be relieved to hear that most laws drafted by the Commission are not on its own initiative. I can't find a statistic from the last few years now, but I believe only around 20% of drafts are on initiative of the Commission itself (of course the number of initiatives is not the greatest measure, since that does not show the impact of the proposed laws but it is some indication).
Also, regardless of how common it is and how much use the Commission makes of it, it might also be a relieve for you to hear that while the Commission can propose new laws, it cannot bring them into effect without the explicit consent of the Council and Parliament (NB Parliament sometimes only has an advisory role).
+Ciceroni That is indeed a relief. It is also sloghtly dishartening, considering the bumber of laws passed that were clearly constructed as tools of economic warfare against states within the union.
It was appearently not the fault of beurocratic overeach, but a disfunctional parlaiment.
Which laws are you talking about exactly?
And you have to keep in mind, that Parliament has not always had the same power it does now. If a law was introduced before the increase in power, it would be unfair to blame them. On top of that, even now there still is plenty of room for improvement!
Why only 9 women out of 28?
This was the composition of the Commission when we made the video. So indeed, at that time only 9 out of 28 Commissioners were women... This time there are 11 female Commissioners and the president is a women, so improvement for women :)
Nice, thank you for your answer
I know, right? Why no blacks or asians either?
@@Ciceroni1 And one fewer member state, so from 32.14% to 40.74%
@@리주민 It's obvious that any given society has about the same number of men and women. Not obvious what percentage of ethnicities you should expect to typically see.
please no more music
None at all? It seems very silent in the background without anything. However, sometimes we made it too loud, I agree:)
These guys should be directly elected but still have to do what's best for the whole EU, that'd probably require a cultural shift on the ground first though
Well it mostly comes down to the President being elected by the EU Parliment thing, but I do agree that it would be helpful if some of the Comissioners were already members of the EU Parliment along with the President.
In Europe most governments and prime ministers are elected indirectly. France is one of the few how get direct elections.
Commission President is indirectly elected, just like any Prime minister.
Direct election
French people > Macron
Indirect election
Americans > Electors > US President
Europeans > MEPs > Commission President
> MPs > Prime Ministers
It's not really that different from direct election. US electors pledge to vote for this or that President, while European MPs/MEPs pledge to vote one or other candidate ("Spitzenkandidat" ~ Lead candidate) during campaigns.
Disadvantage is one extra step in the election process. But advantage is the Commission President or Prime ministers have support of Parliaments and there's no conflict between legislature and executives all the time.
Haebris I disagree. Commissioners are meant to be experts in their field. For example, nearly all national Ministers come to their position the same way as Commissioners. Prime Minister/Commission President is elected by Parliament. They then choose a government (Ministers/Commissioners) which must then be approved as a while by the Queen/Parliament. (Queen for UK only)
I would like to see the EU using semi-presidential system just like France. The problem is most of people don't understand the system as it is now, semi-presidential is even more complicated.
"How about them current issues" 😂
Which ones…?
@@Ciceroni1no i mean it was just funny how you said it :D
Advisor Government of India
あなたの最初の誕生日プレゼントは何ですか？
I am not sure if i understand the question correctly, but honestly i can’t remember. What was yours?
Ouuu my dad works here
nothing to boast about dude. not a well-liked organisation, and for good reason
@@jameslincs With one of the most rigorous recruiting processes, getting a job at one of the top institutions is remarkably tough. The institution is far from universally loved, but the feat of getting a job there is unquestionably remarkable, and certainly something a child to said parent could be proud of.
these are the people with real power in Europe folks
The more I look into the arrangement of the EU, the more horrified I am by the polylithic towering bureaucracy it entails.
My dad works here
Plese help urgently Kosovo🇽🇰 for COVIT-19 with VACCINES 🤲🙏✔
🌻🌼✍️🙏🥬👌
kkk
FREXIT
Why are you in favour of a frexit? What are you looking to change?
@@Ciceroni1 To start with, I simply voted against the e.u by referendum. Referendum not respected...not very democratic.. a VERY BAD START...beside elected among themselves by themselves, von der leyen and her croonies represent no one but themselves. German e.u made in usa was supposed to maintain peace...see the war...technocrat globalist europeist like macron standing to orders! Shameful traitor, meanwhile, ,impoverishing French peoples to the benefits of others., destroying French Sovereignty, privileging migrants over born and breed frenchies...macron/von der leyen/usa impose the woke bullshit and the cancel culture. Nothing good happens for my country with the dreaded hegemonic e.u...and now von der leyen wants a e.u army?! want the nuclear french force? a sit in nato? an e.u army? Von der leyen is a danger, a threat to the world. Believe me there is much to be said about the dread e.u brings to les Francais and others members of that merchant club FREXIT.
EU is the best!
Martin Solomon It’s only his opinion. Don’t shit on people when you don’t agree with them.
The EU is the best for who ?
@@MrBarrsy68 Europeans
Emphasizing the European flag of an agreement between Greece and Macedonia gives and opens a right in the EU states so that larger ethnicities demand the sharing and exit and busting of those EU states. What means that;
- In Germany, there are more than 10 million Turks who with this agreement have the right to seek their own province and proclaim their Turkish territory!
In Sweden Same people, In Belgium Walloon! In Italy Sicilians! In Spain, the Basques! In England Wales, Scotland etc ...
Let's now EU ratify it.
How could anyone support such an undemocratic system. The European Union is technocracy gone off the rails. The fact that this joke of a government has any voice in actually democratic institutions is terrifying
is terrifying that you dont understand English. EU is democratic, watch the video again, and working toward EU country and army. Take your brexiter ignorance back in your Little Britain.. normal EU citizens are molested by brexiter lunatics .Destroy your country, EU try to help and get criticized.. my opinion: let the UK with no deal and in 10 years they will come back as a poor third world country.
Zokll Ehbfd take your Marxism and go back to the Soviet Union comrade
idiot. i living in former fascist ,right-wing state, now democratic Spain.. so what you saying : Marxism is nonexistent , nowhere on Earth.. history moved forward, but UK still going backward.. your reaction is one example.
Zokll Ehbfd your so ignorant of how true democracy really works that you don’t even know what true freedom is. Poor mindless sheep. I feel sorry for you
hahahah Spain is not free or democratic ? heheheh don´t feel sorry for me or us, we, EU citizens are fine and prosperous... We feel sorry for Little Britain, where voters are manipulated, ignorants , uneducated, under false democracy (just for TV shows).. UK is former 5th, 6th or now 7th ?? economy in the world, and sinking... So, first look in your backward country(just England, the others will separate) then criticize others...
Lies
Haha where?
The EU needs to go the same way the USSR went. The fk out. Smash this undemocratic monster.
🙏🙏🌻🌻🌈🌈🥬🥬🐠🐬🐬🐬🐟🐟🐟🐬🐓🦃🍎🥭🥒🥒🍑🌿🍓🥦🍪🍅🍦🍃🍃🐧🍆🦅🍦🍍🍒🦈🌱🌱🥮🥮🫑🫑🌶️🌶️🍒🦈🦈🦈🦈🦈🦈🦈🦈🦈🙏🙏🍎🍎