• jenesaisquoi@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I agree. There have been proposals for reforming the requirement of uninamity but this requires… uninamity.

      • Humanius@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        I do believe that the requirement to reach unanimity is part of the reason why the EU is so good for it citizens. It has to consider the concerns of all member states before policy can be passed, and thus it is more difficult to pass anything that is particularly bad for any member state. I would prefer that not to go away.

        Example being Chat Control. The EU under the Danish presidency is really trying to push that one through, and there is only a handful of countries that are actively opposing it. Unanimity helps keep legislation like that at bay.

        Maybe a better solution would be to only remove unanimity for certain types of policy. I would imagine something like foreign policy, fiscal policy and immigration policy. Unanimity on internal affairs should definitely remain in my opinion.

        Edit: Perhaps also allow the EU to either do military spending or maintain an army, but that might be a bridge too far…
        Hypothetically would achieve the same with a NATO-style alliance between the European states (that excludes the US)