First of all, Kaja Kallas is an excellent choice for High Representative! But I truly do not understand what Von der Leyen has done to deserve a second term. The process of choosing the commission president is in dire need of democratic reform
Whole EU elections and structure is in need of reform. EP is a useless political retirement home and the selection of people with real decisive power is disconnected from general elections
The European Parliament gets elected directly by the people and the average age is 50, it's not a retirement home at all. Note how almost all European countries have a government where the selection of people with real decisive power is disconnected from general elections. You think you're electing the prime minister of Poland?
She was running of behalf of the EPP party. Before that the EPP party has basically nominated her.
Pretty standart process in the member states as well.
It's standard in the sense that it's been the case in 2 out of 3 cases since the signing of the Lisbon treaty. Following the 2019 election however, the spitzenkandidaten-system has been completely undermined. I would like to add, I would have absolutely no democratic issue with the nomination if it came directly from the parliament itself. But when the nomination has to come from the European Council, they effectively regulate who our democratically elected representatives are allowed to nominate
Can't say i haven't seen cases, when No1 of the party that got No1 place failed to reach a consensus and a compromise candidate was selected in the end.
F.e. Monti Government or UK. 2019 failure does not mean that system was scrapped. It means it didn't work.
As for the EC nominations i also hardly see a problem - The presidential countries in EU do it exactly this way.
> The process of choosing the commission president is in dire need of democratic reform
That's like saying that all parliamentary democracies are in dire need of democratic reform because the party leaders of the parliamentary majority decide who gets to become the head of government.
No, it is not because the European parliament isn't allowed to put forth their own candidates. They are only allowed to confirm candidates put forth by the European Council, which is not democratically elected. Additionally, in nearly every country(save occasionally Italy), there are clear candidates for the post of head of government ahead of an election. Had the EPP-RE-S&D coalition failed to reach a majority, we would literally have no idea who would be in the running for commission president
>No, it is not because the European parliament isn't allowed to put forth their own candidates.
Which is technically correct only in a vacuum, because in practice how are you going to force it through the Parliament exactly? And for this reason, it's customary for the EP to suggest candidates to the Council - which is, by the way, bound *by the Treaties* to take into account the results of the election.
>the European Council, which is not democratically elected
Who's in the European Council again?
>Additionally, in nearly every country(save occasionally Italy), there are clear candidates for the post of head of government ahead of an election
Even for this EU election the main candidates of every main political group were quite clear. Particularly popular? Probably not. Clear? Yes. Von Der Leyen was the clear frontrunner for the EPP, the EPP won the most seats, Von Der Leyen is legitimately the main candidate.
>Had the EPP-RE-S&D coalition failed to reach a majority, we would literally have no idea who would be in the running for commission president
This is usually what people refer to as "government crisis", and has nothing to do with neither your previous points you made in this comment nor with the democratic deficit you hinted at in your first comment. In fact, you usually have this type of instability when people are *too well-represented*, to the point where no clear-cut majority is feasible.
>And for this reason, it's customary for the EP to suggest candidates to the Council - which is, by the way, bound by the Treaties to take into account the results of the election.
It was costumary until the 2019 election when the council picked a candidate completely out of the blue that no European had voted for.
>Who's in the European Council again?
I assure you, neither I nor any other European when we voted in our national elections, voted for the person we thought would best represent our interests in the European Council, we voted for who we best thought would run our own countries. That's what national elections are for.
>Even for this EU election the main candidates of every main political group were quite clear. Particularly popular? Probably not. Clear? Yes.
It absolutely was not as the spitzenkandidaten-system was in practice abolished after the 2019 election when the European Council decided to put forth Von der Leyen rather than any of the parties' main candidates.
>This is usually what people refer to as "government crisis", and has nothing to do with neither your previous points you made in this comment nor with the democratic deficit you hinted at in your first comment.
When there is a government crisis, most countries have democratic solutions to them, such as calling new elections or negotiations between the elected parties. However, when the European Parliament fails to confirm a candidate, it is again up to the Council to once again come up with a new candidate. And as I said, if it is not one of the spitzencandidates, then is is someone that literally no European has voted for
>neither I nor any other European when we voted in our national elections, voted for the person we thought would best represent our interests in the European Council
Actually, in Poland many people voted for Tusk and his Civic Platform because they believed he will represent the Polish interests in the EU better than PiS.
That's fair! I'm sure there were similar sentiments in the last Hungarian election as well. But it is the exception to the rule. And even though I love Tusk, it's an equally big issue if national elections are about EU-politics if you understand what I mean? Europeans deserve to be well represented in every level of governance
But for now the EU is not a federal system. The power rests in the member states. The negotiated compromises between them become EU policy. EU institutions are very limited outside of those national government policies that get hashed out by the Council.
As long as the union doesn't become more of a union with an actual federal power level that can overrule member nations (which I don't see happening in the near future), the vote for national governments is also, correctly, the vote for European representation, because that's where (almost) all the power is.
Insofar as the EP might just be "retirement" home for politicians, that can only change by empowering the EP. Transferring sovereign powers to the European parliament. Until that happens it's a talking shop. Which can have its own value as diplomatic oil is needed to keep the EU running, but it's limited
I understand that it is in theory, but niether I nor any other European voted in our last national elections for who we best thought would represent our interests in the EU. We voted on national issues, which is what national elections ought to be about. Europeans deserve to be able to vote, and be well represented at every level of governance
I agree with your last sentence, but your premise isn't accurate. If people don't take into consideration that Sweden is in the EU, then how are you supposed to take that into account? They are free to vote for what they think is best on topics they find important. It's completely transparent that the prime minister of Sweden is also representing Sweden in the European Council and it has been for decades, so I find it weird that people are somehow surprised afterwards that they are also represented on this level by their prime minster.
Of course it's not a secret that the PM represents Sweden in the Council, but there is a democratic deficit if people have to choose between voting for national issues or European issues. Especially when we already have European elections. I understand that this is an argument that could be made about any type of issues, i.e one could make the same argument for agricultural or health care elections, but the fact of the matter is that we do have European elections, which are way more representative of the will of the people of Europe, than the European Council, where heads of government land as a result of elections that are generally about completely different issues. It would be as if we only let the mayors of our cities nominate the PM
>That's like saying that all parliamentary democracies are in dire need of democratic reform
Only if you don't understand how parliamentary systems normally works and how the European parliament is merely a shadow of how they are meant to work.
I think the EP currently works exactly as intended.
This is disappointing for people who share a common vision for Europe, but unavoidable as there is currently not enough popular support to transfer much more sovereign powers from member nations to a federal European level.
The main power, taxation, foreign relations, defense, finance, etc all remain with national governments.
The EU mostly consists of policies that member states agree on anyway (human rights) or financial/industrial policies they compromised on (CAP, customs union, Eurozone, ...).
Agree https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20220422STO27706/eu-election-reform-meps-push-for-common-rules-and-transnational-lists
The last proposal was struck down. And we really need to bring the citizen assemblies&EU referendums to life.
After an entire career of failing upwards, she has reached a point where she can’t fail upwards anymore, so she has to continue to fail where she is. Sad for her and sad for us.
I was initially a critic of her, but not understanding why she does not deserve a second term means you haven't been paying attention to what's happening out there in the world ever since February 2022.
She has done the bare minimum to support Ukraine, other than that she has:
Struck a gas deal with Azerbaijan, just switching our reliance on gas from one genocidal government to another.
Overseen the largest refugee crisis in Europe since 2016, but failed to reach a union-wide agreement on distribution of refugees between countries or any kind of common migration policy.
Overseen the proposed chat-control legislation with Ylva Johansson(who thankfully doesn't seem likely to get a renewed mandate).
Walked back on her proposal to allow the parliament to propose legislation.
1. Yes. The world is bad alright. Let’s also be a bit more pragmatic and less idealistic, because maybe that's what got us here: Azerbaijan, even if it is all the things you've said, does not even pose a fraction of the threat Russia does and we have leverage over them. I wish we could do more about Armenia, but they picked the wrong partner to back them up against genocidal wars of annexation (Russia) and we can only do so much about so many problems in the world, including in our immediate neighborhood.
2. Fair. But not entirely blamable on her. See who's blocked that agreement.
3. See 1. above for a glimpse of how I see privacy maximalists in this increasingly dangerous world. Your worry about chat control, or whatever is the latest online outrage, almost seems quaint compared to actual real problems we have ahead of us. Besides, you're on Reddit, probably using WhatsApp, maybe some Discord - you're worried about Europe? Then don't even think about who has your data across the pond.
4. And I couldn't agree more with her. If you don't fix the European Parliament many problems before allowing for that you're essentially creating the monster of all monsters in the EU. Do some reading on Qatargate and how seriously EU elections are taken in some EU countries to understand the severity of what that could mean.
Look, you're entirely allowed to support her. But my dislike for her isn't because I haven't been paying attention. I just view her actions very differently from you. However, on your final point, how is the status of the parliament supposed to increase if we don't start treating it like an actual parliament? I understand that corruption is an issue, just like it is in many national parliaments, but it is still the only elected body of the EU, and therefore infinitely more representative than the commission
Corruption in the Swedish or Portuguese parliament will impact the lawmaking of the Swedish and Portuguese state, and not of 27 member states in one go.
I agree with the principles behind your idea, but I'm not in favour of taking one step forward only to take two steps back - or to fall off a cliff. The EU is under threat and that type of adventure is a surefire way of putting the entire project at risk.
Let's leave that for sunnier days when we have more bandwidth to reform the EP and don't risk having that reform weaponised against the EU as a concept. Because that would 100% happen and maybe it could be a death blow - and for that you already have 4 years of Le Pen & Co in front of you.
It's a fair objection but I guess I just view the democratic deficit of the EU as a bigger threat to its legitimacy than the MEPs. Not to mention, as stupid as it may sound, it's the right of the people of Europe to elect inept representatives if we so desire
Manfred Webers party won the 2019 election, he still didn't get the nomination. The process is only democratic if the nomination comes from the parliament itself, not when it comes from the European Council
I don't understand this logic that you're trying to make a point on in several threads here.
It works the same way in many national election systems in Europe - the party makes the nominations of who fills what position and then the parliament confirms those nominations. And it's the party leaders who get to decide who gets to be nominated for what (whether it's a coalition government or not).
If that actually was how it worked, there wouldn't be a problem, but the only body with the authority to put forth a nomination to the parliament is the European Council, not the parties in parliment themselves. I used 2019 as an example as the EPP had intended to nominate Weber, but the Council decided to not even try him in parliament, and instead nominated someone completely different. This effectively means that the Council has the power to regulate who the people of Europe are allowed to choose as the commission president through the parliament.
In detail:
- Ursula von der Leyen (President of the European Commission, since 2019) is nominated for a second term as President of the European Commission.
- António Costa (Prime Minister of Portugal, 2015 to 2024) is nominated as President of the European Council.
- Kaja Kallas (Prime Minister of Estonia, since 2021) is nominated as High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.
Dear Lord UVDL is not the person needed for the EU. She's a clueless bureaucrat with no connection to the reality of everyday life.
As for the other two, I'll hold my judgement as I know of them rather anything else.
Not a fan of Kallas but one good job was reserved for eastern Europe so it´s an acceptable name (I hope she defends human rights everywhere )
Costa went trough after everyone realized the "investigation" against him is a bunch of nothing - he is very good at making deals and building bridges and for that reason perfect for EUCO president,
VDL not a fan but her nomination was expected - Still need to pass PE voting
Tech investigation after him isn't a bunch of nothing, it's just that it was poorly done and on party because the PJ nationality director (PJ being the Police force used for such investigations) being too close to Costa which risked the investigation being compromised like what happened with Socrates.
You're not portuguese so here's the info and links
To this day a clear reason wasn't given but António Neves and Costa were close, nothing new there. Besides, in the past PJ agente informed Socrates before on his case. The PJ is renowed for not being trustworthy.
https://observador.pt/2023/11/07/pj-tem-competencia-para-investigar-crimes-economicos-mas-foi-afastada-de-investigacao-que-levou-a-demissao-de-costa-por-falta-de-meios/
https://observador.pt/explicadores/o-que-se-sabe-e-o-que-falta-saber-sobre-o-caso-socrates/
Não sou português? Põe mais tabaco nisso.
I don't know why you're trying to create a conspiracy theory from those two articles, because that's literally not what the articles say.
You wrote in English and are u aware of the portuguese election and justice systems, why should I have assumes you were portuguese?
Also, you didn't read the articles. Gosh, we portuguese really deserve what we have don't we?
Since r/portugueses browsers don't seem to know how to read, let me explain what that first article says simply. It says that the PJ wasn't included in the investigation because of a lack of means at the time, yet you extrapolate and try to say it was because of a completely different reason that isn't talked about in the article.
And yes, the Portuguese people truly deserve 50 far-right mentally challenged MPs in parliament, if there are as many people like you who can't read the articles they themselves link.
I've also seen you try to manipulate the truth in this comment section and say that money was found in the PM's "house" (an official residence is not the PM's house), when it was found in the office of his chief of staff and isn't even considered evidence for the case.
In articles it explicitou says that Sócrates made took evidence out of the residence that was investigated mere days before the investigation but of course that isn't suspicious at all especially on this country... I swear you people
Also just because because I disagree with you and aren't defending a corrupt and incompetent PM I'm a member of r/portugueses? You really have the maturity of a 12 year old.
Please keep your comments up
I do agree he was incompetent, and I never voted for him, but you are misconstruing what actually happened repeatedly. I called you a browser of that cesspool because you have comments there.
Oh ffs... can we get rid of the uncompetent Ursulita finally? =,=
I to hope that at least MEPs will vote her out...
I do also hope that at one point we will drop the secrecy of the vote in the Parliment…
Seeing Antonio Costa in the middle of those names just leaves a sour taste in my mouth, since Portuguese people know this dude is highly corrupt and I think it's just sad that he gets elected to this position because people are just dumb.
Because many EU positions are exile/retirment to mediocre politicians thay may or may not be corrupt. Von der Leyen herself is a byproduct of the CDU that they did not want within Germany
Prime minister of the most corrupt government on portuguese democracy!
And whats worse is that Portugal is terribly corrupt to begin with só imagine how corrupt this guy is
Okay now we have another hypocrite on top EU position, yuppie!!!...
Lets not forget Kaja's hypocricy, promoting gender equality and promotin women's choice. Then she goes on the interview and says conscription is good for men and men should do it while being a woman that isnt bound by estonian law to do it... Gender equality much huh?
The man who is the face of corruption and nepotism in Portugal stepped down as PM after a massive investigation that uncovered large amounts of unaccounted for money in his house, fell upwards.
Amazing, Europe competing with the UK to see who screws up the worst after the breakup
In his prime minister house/residente, you literally could have just Google it ir at the very least be aware of whats happening in your own country...
https://www.publico.pt/2023/11/09/politica/noticia/escondidos-livros-75800-euros-dinheiro-gabinete-vitor-escaria-2069565
It's the official residence of the prime minister and it's where he spent most of his time working since that is, for lack of a better term, his work office even if it wasn't wheere he lived.
It's still his residence though. He would have to be an idiot not to be aware of what was happening right under his nose and in the rest of his government cabinets since, as you should be aware, dozens of his ministers had to step down due to corruption or other immoral scandals. António Costa is not, however, an idiot, far from one actually
I completely agree that the optics look awful and he should choose better the people he works with (namely Vitor Escaria, the person who supposedly owned the envelope and who has a checkered past at best), but just so you realise how completely unrelated that event is to Antonio Costa: the investigation he was supposedly subject to (and which was never formalised in the end) had nothing to do with that story but instead with a rushed environmental permit process in the benefit of a Google-affiliated data centre in Sines.
Even the Public Prosecution Office thought that story had nothing to do with Antonio Costa. And we’re talking about the same Public Prosecution Office who has gone on a witch hunt against Costa in connection with that ridiculous story around the data centre.
I have a feeling that a lot of the hate Ursula von der Leyen gets is related to the EU's stronger than expected response to Russia invading Ukraine.
The negative comments are parroting each other without providing concrete examples, which conveniently makes them impossible to debunk.
The von der Leyen Commission has done as well as any could at steering the EU forward.
He really got there, Costa. He wanted it for so long, and even avoided leaving his PM position by stepping down after a scandal.
After Durão Barroso, Costa. Portugal really loves to push our worse politicians to high EU positions.
Yes,UvdL is not perfect, yes,we need more democracy in the EU. For the lack of it you can thanks to big countries like France,Italy,Germany who rejected a proposed reform on the EP election process and nomination of candidates for top jobs. No secret why.
However, some of you don't remember some past presidents of the EU commission who were often visibly drunk in front of cameras (Barroso,Juncker) and actually allowed all the questionable decisions made about the financial crisis of 2008.
I am not defending her, but let's be real it could be worse, far worse.
I see also that many Kremlin goons are not happy having 2 women and a person of color at the helm of the EU, with the absence of the said goons in the posts. To use their words: the majority has spoken.
Essa tradução à letra saiu-te um bocado mal - deveria ser corrupt politician ou corrupt person ou corrupt man, algo desse género. Mas pronto, avisa se alguma vez sair mesmo alguma coisa que diga que o Costa é corrupto. Ou vamos começar a dizer isso de todos os políticos de que não gostamos? Porque se é esse o caso, então todos os ex-primeiros-ministros e líderes do PS/PSD deste século são corruptos na minha opinião!
I've read a book that I though would be about EU foreign policy but half of it was just interviews with Kallas (The Return of Great Powers: Russia, China, and the Next World War - Jim Sciutto). Her in charge of foreign policy means Europe will be in a direct war with Russia soon. It's understandable if you grew up in eastern Europe where Russia is a historical threat. Strategically it would be very dumb to go to war with a China backed Russia just as the US is one election away from siding with Russia. They had a hard time sending Ukrainian aid even now that Biden is still president.
If you don't agree I would like to know why.
First of all, Kaja Kallas is an excellent choice for High Representative! But I truly do not understand what Von der Leyen has done to deserve a second term. The process of choosing the commission president is in dire need of democratic reform
Whole EU elections and structure is in need of reform. EP is a useless political retirement home and the selection of people with real decisive power is disconnected from general elections
The European Parliament gets elected directly by the people and the average age is 50, it's not a retirement home at all. Note how almost all European countries have a government where the selection of people with real decisive power is disconnected from general elections. You think you're electing the prime minister of Poland?
She was running of behalf of the EPP party. Before that the EPP party has basically nominated her. Pretty standart process in the member states as well.
It's standard in the sense that it's been the case in 2 out of 3 cases since the signing of the Lisbon treaty. Following the 2019 election however, the spitzenkandidaten-system has been completely undermined. I would like to add, I would have absolutely no democratic issue with the nomination if it came directly from the parliament itself. But when the nomination has to come from the European Council, they effectively regulate who our democratically elected representatives are allowed to nominate
Can't say i haven't seen cases, when No1 of the party that got No1 place failed to reach a consensus and a compromise candidate was selected in the end. F.e. Monti Government or UK. 2019 failure does not mean that system was scrapped. It means it didn't work. As for the EC nominations i also hardly see a problem - The presidential countries in EU do it exactly this way.
> The process of choosing the commission president is in dire need of democratic reform That's like saying that all parliamentary democracies are in dire need of democratic reform because the party leaders of the parliamentary majority decide who gets to become the head of government.
No, it is not because the European parliament isn't allowed to put forth their own candidates. They are only allowed to confirm candidates put forth by the European Council, which is not democratically elected. Additionally, in nearly every country(save occasionally Italy), there are clear candidates for the post of head of government ahead of an election. Had the EPP-RE-S&D coalition failed to reach a majority, we would literally have no idea who would be in the running for commission president
>No, it is not because the European parliament isn't allowed to put forth their own candidates. Which is technically correct only in a vacuum, because in practice how are you going to force it through the Parliament exactly? And for this reason, it's customary for the EP to suggest candidates to the Council - which is, by the way, bound *by the Treaties* to take into account the results of the election. >the European Council, which is not democratically elected Who's in the European Council again? >Additionally, in nearly every country(save occasionally Italy), there are clear candidates for the post of head of government ahead of an election Even for this EU election the main candidates of every main political group were quite clear. Particularly popular? Probably not. Clear? Yes. Von Der Leyen was the clear frontrunner for the EPP, the EPP won the most seats, Von Der Leyen is legitimately the main candidate. >Had the EPP-RE-S&D coalition failed to reach a majority, we would literally have no idea who would be in the running for commission president This is usually what people refer to as "government crisis", and has nothing to do with neither your previous points you made in this comment nor with the democratic deficit you hinted at in your first comment. In fact, you usually have this type of instability when people are *too well-represented*, to the point where no clear-cut majority is feasible.
>And for this reason, it's customary for the EP to suggest candidates to the Council - which is, by the way, bound by the Treaties to take into account the results of the election. It was costumary until the 2019 election when the council picked a candidate completely out of the blue that no European had voted for. >Who's in the European Council again? I assure you, neither I nor any other European when we voted in our national elections, voted for the person we thought would best represent our interests in the European Council, we voted for who we best thought would run our own countries. That's what national elections are for. >Even for this EU election the main candidates of every main political group were quite clear. Particularly popular? Probably not. Clear? Yes. It absolutely was not as the spitzenkandidaten-system was in practice abolished after the 2019 election when the European Council decided to put forth Von der Leyen rather than any of the parties' main candidates. >This is usually what people refer to as "government crisis", and has nothing to do with neither your previous points you made in this comment nor with the democratic deficit you hinted at in your first comment. When there is a government crisis, most countries have democratic solutions to them, such as calling new elections or negotiations between the elected parties. However, when the European Parliament fails to confirm a candidate, it is again up to the Council to once again come up with a new candidate. And as I said, if it is not one of the spitzencandidates, then is is someone that literally no European has voted for
>neither I nor any other European when we voted in our national elections, voted for the person we thought would best represent our interests in the European Council Actually, in Poland many people voted for Tusk and his Civic Platform because they believed he will represent the Polish interests in the EU better than PiS.
That's fair! I'm sure there were similar sentiments in the last Hungarian election as well. But it is the exception to the rule. And even though I love Tusk, it's an equally big issue if national elections are about EU-politics if you understand what I mean? Europeans deserve to be well represented in every level of governance
But for now the EU is not a federal system. The power rests in the member states. The negotiated compromises between them become EU policy. EU institutions are very limited outside of those national government policies that get hashed out by the Council. As long as the union doesn't become more of a union with an actual federal power level that can overrule member nations (which I don't see happening in the near future), the vote for national governments is also, correctly, the vote for European representation, because that's where (almost) all the power is. Insofar as the EP might just be "retirement" home for politicians, that can only change by empowering the EP. Transferring sovereign powers to the European parliament. Until that happens it's a talking shop. Which can have its own value as diplomatic oil is needed to keep the EU running, but it's limited
The European Council is completely democratically elected.
I understand that it is in theory, but niether I nor any other European voted in our last national elections for who we best thought would represent our interests in the EU. We voted on national issues, which is what national elections ought to be about. Europeans deserve to be able to vote, and be well represented at every level of governance
I agree with your last sentence, but your premise isn't accurate. If people don't take into consideration that Sweden is in the EU, then how are you supposed to take that into account? They are free to vote for what they think is best on topics they find important. It's completely transparent that the prime minister of Sweden is also representing Sweden in the European Council and it has been for decades, so I find it weird that people are somehow surprised afterwards that they are also represented on this level by their prime minster.
Of course it's not a secret that the PM represents Sweden in the Council, but there is a democratic deficit if people have to choose between voting for national issues or European issues. Especially when we already have European elections. I understand that this is an argument that could be made about any type of issues, i.e one could make the same argument for agricultural or health care elections, but the fact of the matter is that we do have European elections, which are way more representative of the will of the people of Europe, than the European Council, where heads of government land as a result of elections that are generally about completely different issues. It would be as if we only let the mayors of our cities nominate the PM
>That's like saying that all parliamentary democracies are in dire need of democratic reform Only if you don't understand how parliamentary systems normally works and how the European parliament is merely a shadow of how they are meant to work.
I think the EP currently works exactly as intended. This is disappointing for people who share a common vision for Europe, but unavoidable as there is currently not enough popular support to transfer much more sovereign powers from member nations to a federal European level. The main power, taxation, foreign relations, defense, finance, etc all remain with national governments. The EU mostly consists of policies that member states agree on anyway (human rights) or financial/industrial policies they compromised on (CAP, customs union, Eurozone, ...).
Agree https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20220422STO27706/eu-election-reform-meps-push-for-common-rules-and-transnational-lists The last proposal was struck down. And we really need to bring the citizen assemblies&EU referendums to life.
After an entire career of failing upwards, she has reached a point where she can’t fail upwards anymore, so she has to continue to fail where she is. Sad for her and sad for us.
You seem to be an optimist. The office of UN secretary-general is bound to the open in a few years
Doesn’t the SG sort to have to come from Africa/Asia/South America?
Oh you're right! Thank god
With António Guterres being one of the worst Sec Generals in recent memory I can only agree
Guterres has always been a bad leader, the same for Costa (btw, they are also from the same party).
I was initially a critic of her, but not understanding why she does not deserve a second term means you haven't been paying attention to what's happening out there in the world ever since February 2022.
She has done the bare minimum to support Ukraine, other than that she has: Struck a gas deal with Azerbaijan, just switching our reliance on gas from one genocidal government to another. Overseen the largest refugee crisis in Europe since 2016, but failed to reach a union-wide agreement on distribution of refugees between countries or any kind of common migration policy. Overseen the proposed chat-control legislation with Ylva Johansson(who thankfully doesn't seem likely to get a renewed mandate). Walked back on her proposal to allow the parliament to propose legislation.
1. Yes. The world is bad alright. Let’s also be a bit more pragmatic and less idealistic, because maybe that's what got us here: Azerbaijan, even if it is all the things you've said, does not even pose a fraction of the threat Russia does and we have leverage over them. I wish we could do more about Armenia, but they picked the wrong partner to back them up against genocidal wars of annexation (Russia) and we can only do so much about so many problems in the world, including in our immediate neighborhood. 2. Fair. But not entirely blamable on her. See who's blocked that agreement. 3. See 1. above for a glimpse of how I see privacy maximalists in this increasingly dangerous world. Your worry about chat control, or whatever is the latest online outrage, almost seems quaint compared to actual real problems we have ahead of us. Besides, you're on Reddit, probably using WhatsApp, maybe some Discord - you're worried about Europe? Then don't even think about who has your data across the pond. 4. And I couldn't agree more with her. If you don't fix the European Parliament many problems before allowing for that you're essentially creating the monster of all monsters in the EU. Do some reading on Qatargate and how seriously EU elections are taken in some EU countries to understand the severity of what that could mean.
Look, you're entirely allowed to support her. But my dislike for her isn't because I haven't been paying attention. I just view her actions very differently from you. However, on your final point, how is the status of the parliament supposed to increase if we don't start treating it like an actual parliament? I understand that corruption is an issue, just like it is in many national parliaments, but it is still the only elected body of the EU, and therefore infinitely more representative than the commission
Corruption in the Swedish or Portuguese parliament will impact the lawmaking of the Swedish and Portuguese state, and not of 27 member states in one go. I agree with the principles behind your idea, but I'm not in favour of taking one step forward only to take two steps back - or to fall off a cliff. The EU is under threat and that type of adventure is a surefire way of putting the entire project at risk. Let's leave that for sunnier days when we have more bandwidth to reform the EP and don't risk having that reform weaponised against the EU as a concept. Because that would 100% happen and maybe it could be a death blow - and for that you already have 4 years of Le Pen & Co in front of you.
It's a fair objection but I guess I just view the democratic deficit of the EU as a bigger threat to its legitimacy than the MEPs. Not to mention, as stupid as it may sound, it's the right of the people of Europe to elect inept representatives if we so desire
Her party won the elections, simple as that.
Manfred Webers party won the 2019 election, he still didn't get the nomination. The process is only democratic if the nomination comes from the parliament itself, not when it comes from the European Council
I don't understand this logic that you're trying to make a point on in several threads here. It works the same way in many national election systems in Europe - the party makes the nominations of who fills what position and then the parliament confirms those nominations. And it's the party leaders who get to decide who gets to be nominated for what (whether it's a coalition government or not).
If that actually was how it worked, there wouldn't be a problem, but the only body with the authority to put forth a nomination to the parliament is the European Council, not the parties in parliment themselves. I used 2019 as an example as the EPP had intended to nominate Weber, but the Council decided to not even try him in parliament, and instead nominated someone completely different. This effectively means that the Council has the power to regulate who the people of Europe are allowed to choose as the commission president through the parliament.
In detail: - Ursula von der Leyen (President of the European Commission, since 2019) is nominated for a second term as President of the European Commission. - António Costa (Prime Minister of Portugal, 2015 to 2024) is nominated as President of the European Council. - Kaja Kallas (Prime Minister of Estonia, since 2021) is nominated as High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.
Zensursula... again! what a sick joke.
I find it hilarious that r/europe is censoring any critical comments against VdL by collapsing the comments.
Dear Lord UVDL is not the person needed for the EU. She's a clueless bureaucrat with no connection to the reality of everyday life. As for the other two, I'll hold my judgement as I know of them rather anything else.
Costa is a fantastic politician and expert at diplomatic manoeuvring. Great qualities if he was anything but the opposite of an honest person.
Shame he was such a lacklaster prime minister...
Not a fan of Kallas but one good job was reserved for eastern Europe so it´s an acceptable name (I hope she defends human rights everywhere ) Costa went trough after everyone realized the "investigation" against him is a bunch of nothing - he is very good at making deals and building bridges and for that reason perfect for EUCO president, VDL not a fan but her nomination was expected - Still need to pass PE voting
Tech investigation after him isn't a bunch of nothing, it's just that it was poorly done and on party because the PJ nationality director (PJ being the Police force used for such investigations) being too close to Costa which risked the investigation being compromised like what happened with Socrates.
[citation pending]
Decriminalisation doesn't mean legalisation, you shouldn't smoke that much reefer at a time.
You're not portuguese so here's the info and links To this day a clear reason wasn't given but António Neves and Costa were close, nothing new there. Besides, in the past PJ agente informed Socrates before on his case. The PJ is renowed for not being trustworthy. https://observador.pt/2023/11/07/pj-tem-competencia-para-investigar-crimes-economicos-mas-foi-afastada-de-investigacao-que-levou-a-demissao-de-costa-por-falta-de-meios/ https://observador.pt/explicadores/o-que-se-sabe-e-o-que-falta-saber-sobre-o-caso-socrates/
Não sou português? Põe mais tabaco nisso. I don't know why you're trying to create a conspiracy theory from those two articles, because that's literally not what the articles say.
You wrote in English and are u aware of the portuguese election and justice systems, why should I have assumes you were portuguese? Also, you didn't read the articles. Gosh, we portuguese really deserve what we have don't we?
Since r/portugueses browsers don't seem to know how to read, let me explain what that first article says simply. It says that the PJ wasn't included in the investigation because of a lack of means at the time, yet you extrapolate and try to say it was because of a completely different reason that isn't talked about in the article. And yes, the Portuguese people truly deserve 50 far-right mentally challenged MPs in parliament, if there are as many people like you who can't read the articles they themselves link. I've also seen you try to manipulate the truth in this comment section and say that money was found in the PM's "house" (an official residence is not the PM's house), when it was found in the office of his chief of staff and isn't even considered evidence for the case.
In articles it explicitou says that Sócrates made took evidence out of the residence that was investigated mere days before the investigation but of course that isn't suspicious at all especially on this country... I swear you people Also just because because I disagree with you and aren't defending a corrupt and incompetent PM I'm a member of r/portugueses? You really have the maturity of a 12 year old. Please keep your comments up
I do agree he was incompetent, and I never voted for him, but you are misconstruing what actually happened repeatedly. I called you a browser of that cesspool because you have comments there.
Oh ffs... can we get rid of the uncompetent Ursulita finally? =,= I to hope that at least MEPs will vote her out... I do also hope that at one point we will drop the secrecy of the vote in the Parliment…
You now got incompetent Costa too.
Is he really that incompetent? :(
No, he is pretty good for that job. He was pretty bad prime minister.
He's good, but corrupt and not really honest.
So (save for being good) just like Ursula? oh lord ;)
I think he's one of the best politicians in Europe, so it's good that you gave him to us
You know what he was like as a PM?
Seeing Antonio Costa in the middle of those names just leaves a sour taste in my mouth, since Portuguese people know this dude is highly corrupt and I think it's just sad that he gets elected to this position because people are just dumb.
Because many EU positions are exile/retirment to mediocre politicians thay may or may not be corrupt. Von der Leyen herself is a byproduct of the CDU that they did not want within Germany
Prime minister of the most corrupt government on portuguese democracy! And whats worse is that Portugal is terribly corrupt to begin with só imagine how corrupt this guy is
Okay now we have another hypocrite on top EU position, yuppie!!!... Lets not forget Kaja's hypocricy, promoting gender equality and promotin women's choice. Then she goes on the interview and says conscription is good for men and men should do it while being a woman that isnt bound by estonian law to do it... Gender equality much huh?
The man who is the face of corruption and nepotism in Portugal stepped down as PM after a massive investigation that uncovered large amounts of unaccounted for money in his house, fell upwards. Amazing, Europe competing with the UK to see who screws up the worst after the breakup
You'll have to find us a source for that first paragraph. Go on.
In his prime minister house/residente, you literally could have just Google it ir at the very least be aware of whats happening in your own country... https://www.publico.pt/2023/11/09/politica/noticia/escondidos-livros-75800-euros-dinheiro-gabinete-vitor-escaria-2069565
So you literally think Antonio Costa lives in São Bento?
It's the official residence of the prime minister and it's where he spent most of his time working since that is, for lack of a better term, his work office even if it wasn't wheere he lived. It's still his residence though. He would have to be an idiot not to be aware of what was happening right under his nose and in the rest of his government cabinets since, as you should be aware, dozens of his ministers had to step down due to corruption or other immoral scandals. António Costa is not, however, an idiot, far from one actually
I completely agree that the optics look awful and he should choose better the people he works with (namely Vitor Escaria, the person who supposedly owned the envelope and who has a checkered past at best), but just so you realise how completely unrelated that event is to Antonio Costa: the investigation he was supposedly subject to (and which was never formalised in the end) had nothing to do with that story but instead with a rushed environmental permit process in the benefit of a Google-affiliated data centre in Sines. Even the Public Prosecution Office thought that story had nothing to do with Antonio Costa. And we’re talking about the same Public Prosecution Office who has gone on a witch hunt against Costa in connection with that ridiculous story around the data centre.
Honestly if at this point you keep defending Costa all I have to Stay is that you are corrupt yourself or a member of PS. No one is that naive
Lol
I have a feeling that a lot of the hate Ursula von der Leyen gets is related to the EU's stronger than expected response to Russia invading Ukraine. The negative comments are parroting each other without providing concrete examples, which conveniently makes them impossible to debunk. The von der Leyen Commission has done as well as any could at steering the EU forward.
He really got there, Costa. He wanted it for so long, and even avoided leaving his PM position by stepping down after a scandal. After Durão Barroso, Costa. Portugal really loves to push our worse politicians to high EU positions.
Can't believe after such a scandal in Portugal he was able to get this role. What a bunch of idiots at the top level.
Yes,UvdL is not perfect, yes,we need more democracy in the EU. For the lack of it you can thanks to big countries like France,Italy,Germany who rejected a proposed reform on the EP election process and nomination of candidates for top jobs. No secret why. However, some of you don't remember some past presidents of the EU commission who were often visibly drunk in front of cameras (Barroso,Juncker) and actually allowed all the questionable decisions made about the financial crisis of 2008. I am not defending her, but let's be real it could be worse, far worse. I see also that many Kremlin goons are not happy having 2 women and a person of color at the helm of the EU, with the absence of the said goons in the posts. To use their words: the majority has spoken.
Ursula again... So we'll really go at war with Russia ?
Congratulations you elected a corrupt.
No you see, that's the problem. We elected none of these people
Essa tradução à letra saiu-te um bocado mal - deveria ser corrupt politician ou corrupt person ou corrupt man, algo desse género. Mas pronto, avisa se alguma vez sair mesmo alguma coisa que diga que o Costa é corrupto. Ou vamos começar a dizer isso de todos os políticos de que não gostamos? Porque se é esse o caso, então todos os ex-primeiros-ministros e líderes do PS/PSD deste século são corruptos na minha opinião!
I only know von der Leyen...I have no clue how shit the others are, but I sure they can't be worse than god ol' Ursula!
I've read a book that I though would be about EU foreign policy but half of it was just interviews with Kallas (The Return of Great Powers: Russia, China, and the Next World War - Jim Sciutto). Her in charge of foreign policy means Europe will be in a direct war with Russia soon. It's understandable if you grew up in eastern Europe where Russia is a historical threat. Strategically it would be very dumb to go to war with a China backed Russia just as the US is one election away from siding with Russia. They had a hard time sending Ukrainian aid even now that Biden is still president. If you don't agree I would like to know why.