A BIG Step Towards a Federal Europe? (ft. UEF) - Part 1 

If we're already renaming things, the confusing "Council of the EU" and "European Council" thing should be sorted out, as no one can distinghish between these two without being confused which is which. If the plan is to have a true bicameral system, it would be adequate to rename the Council of the EU (the council of ministers) to "Senate", being the Upper Chamber, while the European Council (heads of governments) which has the character of a more informal meeting ("summits") could keep the term "council"

I think the only way the EU countries are going to federalize is if those wanting federalization leave behind those who do not. So creating a Federal Union WITHIN the European Union with both operating at the same time.

Why would the small countries be in favor of being guaranteed of losing their minister in the European Commission? How do we trust every single president of the union will handpick the right and fairest bunch?

I am not a European, but I closely follow this channel and the issues it raises from the perspective of another (sub)continental political organization, ASEAN (specifically the Philippines). This is arguably the second most successful subcontinent-scale political organization, but it is very different from the EU with no prospect of federalization in the coming decade or two. So I am interested in what can be achieved at the confederal level, and how the emergence of (sub)continental political entities complements or transcends the state system that came out of European wars and colonialism, the so-called Westphalian state system that assigns very specific roles to nation states. I think there is a need to balance political interests at global (UN), (sub)continental and national levels. The path forward won't be simple, and the whole world is watching the progress of the European project. Thank you for making the complexities of Europe a bit more comprehensible.

Something I have never understood is why does Europe want to be federalized? It's not as great as you think.

While i understand that this may be better for states like Belgiuml, Netherlands, Germany, I do feel that the eastern europeans members might be forced to back down from ramping up their industry since they too want to get rich like the Westerners who by Industry in the 19th-20th and 21st centuries became superpowers with colonies around the globe, while eastern Europe was under the stranglehold of Either Austria-hungary, Germany, Ottomans, Russia who aren't very known for their Industrial capabilities (except of course Germany) Europe will become divided by East-West Economical Inbalance which has to be fixed, I as a czech do not want to drive 30 minutes away just to find a German doing my exact job and making 4 times the money i do in the Čr. Simply east has less buying power than the west. The West by polluting the world in the Industrial revolution now wants to fix their mistake by stopping or limiting their own and the Industry of others to a more sustainable one, but the east didn't have the headstart with Industry like the west did therefore they have less money and see this as the west being hypocrites trying to prevent the east to rise to the same level of wealth. While I very much would love to stand united with my European Kin i'd have to be equal to them first, since no act of Union is truly a Union until its Equal. -->Forgive my bad grammar English is my second language)

Please keep us updated :)

Hello, I'm from Poland and I don't agree with the European Union. In 2004, when we joined the EU, we only thought that it would be about the freedom of trade and movement of people, and not about striving to create one super-large country under the dictation of Germany, thank you, I prefer to live in Poland and cooperate, but not in this edition. Creating something like this takes away the independence of countries without any opposition because they want to push through changes for their own benefit. It reminds me of the Soviet Union and reeks of communism from a mile away, disguised as democracy. Most governments in Europe are leftist, and besides, each country has its own culture and you will see, maybe not immediately, but everywhere this culture will be killed and a new phenomenon will be created, the same as what happened in the Soviet Union. Our ancestors did not die in wars so that we would now give up our independence and culture. Leaving the EU is the only way to maintain independence. Leftist values ​​are bad

While I'm all for the EU coming closer together, I just see it as borderline impossible that the countries opposing further integration will drop their opposition to such a big shift of competencies to Brussels. Other than the two-speed Europe proposition, I think the only probable outcomes are that the proposal completely fails and dies out after years of debate, or that after said years of debate the changes get watered down so much they become irrelevant even after being passed. I want to believe, but it's hard 😬

We will never give up veto 🇮🇪🇮🇪🇮🇪 It protects small countries against big powers like France etc.

This is one of your best videos yet! Very excited how this debate goes and of course hear your thoughts on it.

I don't think this would pass the counsel in its current from. Why would they vote for themselves to have less power?

The proposal is through the parliament. Now, even if it would pass through the council (20-23.12.2023), I don’t see any way that it could pass through the unanimity vote. The unanimity vote is the problem which causes the need for change of voting system. There is no way, that someone like Orban would give up on his biggest leverage, which he likes to exploit so much.

Im pro EU but Orban and Poland THEY ARE RIGHT. IF THEY DONT WANT TO TAKE MIGRANTS, THEY SHOULD DECIDE FOR THIER OWN PPL

Wonderfull video. Thank you very much to share this type of content and propose a debate about a theme that big medias don't involve people.

Quite frankly I don't see how majority voting can work when to things like foreign policy. Do we really imagined that 45% of EU countries would allow themselves to get dragged into a war or some foreign entanglement after losing a vote?

Scraping veto and replacing it with qualified majority (55% of votes representing 65% of population) would take virtually all power away from smaller less populous members and give it to large members with high population. Namely France, Germany, Spain, Italy and to the lesser extend Poland. Take any combination of 3 from this group and you are close to 50% or even over 50%. So all these 3 countries have to do not is to find 12 countries.... and since most small countries are economic satellites of these 5 that can be easily bullied into submission or bribed you can pass anything. Now factor in all those exemptions various countries have which means some of them dont care about some particular issues because they are exempt anyway and they can simply trade their vote for something they also want to pass for free. Good luck pushing this..... If you want to democratize the EU and make it more efficient: first remove all exemptions, bring everyone into Shengen which would make every country and thus every citizen equal and then you can propose something like removing veto.

If the changes will be decided by the leaders, they might pass. If the nations will have a say, they will never pass.

Its a risky proposal (cough Orban cough) , but i am down for it. May we finally enter the first steps of an actual union, with the final step towards a Federation!

EU member state: "EU slow to react" "undemocratic" "overly bureaucratic" EU: *proposes reasonable solutions* EU member state: BuT mAh SoVrENtY

So the European Court of Justice will be the one that has the final say of if each country follows EU law. That makes it a very important institution for the future of the EU. Maybe the most important.

Very good video. Can you make a video called "If Romania and the Republic of Moldova unite, how would the EU help." For more details you can see Romania and Moldova United? Europe's Newest Nation, and and to prevent a similar scenario as West and East Germany, check and Why Germany is Still Divided 30 Years Later, both video on TLDR News EU.

I think that abolishing unanimity voting is the best thing that could happen to the European Union. If, however, the reform fails, I believe that a 2-speed EU is essential so as not to hold back those who are prepared to make concessions in order to fly the EU flag as high as possible. I think it's a shame and counterproductive that some countries belonging to the EU are not adopting the euro as their national currency - it's ridiculous. We are 100% in a process or not at all. There are too many prerogatives within the EU. Thank you for your clear and constructive explanations. ♥️🇪🇺🇺🇦♥️

Who "needs" it? Who is "we"? How did it become decided that "we" need it?

Ok it all sounds simple and easy, but I have a question. What would be a path to make these changes a reality? National governments have to vote on this? Both chambers? Presidents of UE countries? EU Parliament? Council? Orban is not gonna lose any time soon and before this proposal is actually in the final stage, Le Pen and others might come to power. I just don't see this happening with rising euroscepticism and it just seems like a forward escape.

When i was younger, i wanted a unified eu, but as i got older, im now very against centralisation. I think the eu should remain a broad federation of allied independent states. I dont want brussels deciding the future of my country especially given their history of pushing mass immigration and increased internet regulation. European countries are not like american states. They are distinct peoples with unique cultures and millenia of history. A centralised eu will innevidably work to hollow out and disregard those identities to be stable.

The EU is good for trade and economic partnership but not for political matters. If the veto will be gone, some countries will be forced to accept laws and rules from Brussels. That's not very democratic in my opinion. The same as a Federal European State or United States of Europe. I think it will not work because to many different cultures and mindsets. Just look at Yugoslavia.

EU needs to get serious about illegal immigration. We (including the joke that now has become the UK) need to get serious about deportation and the cancer that is terrorism.

So what happend? 28th Nov as I'm writing this. Did it got the green light and moved to European council? Couldn't find any info on google.

I like the changes, but with a 55% minimum feels low. We have the Veto system so everyone is on the same page always, it's to make sure the EU stays together. Achieving the same unity with 55% is I'm not sure gonna work...

create your own army, and handle your own security otherwise you are a colony

This sounds like a powergrab by Brussel bureaucrats. All these proposals would do is to drive away more countries away from the EU, such as Eastern European states and other EU hesitant countries like Denmark or Italy. The veto acts like a mechanism of keeping in check powers, just like how US president can veto laws made by the legislature. Essentially for EU where member leaders act like head of state AND parliament, this balance in power ensures greater consideration and diplomacy in making and enacting laws for the best interest of all EU members, instead of only a small majority i.e. Germany or France or other big member states. The EU has already lost the UK and instead of rectifying the reality that a lot of people has for how they perceive the EU, they’re doing the opposite.

As long as the EU supports immigration from areas that don't integrate, like ever, I will never support the Union.

It is very telling that a subject of change of this magnitude gets barely 100k views on youtube.

I actually agree that the EU should have a single migration policy. If one country refuses to take migrants, then no migrants come in.

Yeah, right. Countries that for houndreds of years fought to not be under controll of major european powers will for sure hand over their self governing and unite in one federated europe. For sure

I hope that the citizens out there in the different EU countries will get the opportunity to say yes or no, to all those changes. It’s a big no, seen from my Danish point off view.

It's simple - you want to talk to EU call Germans.

Democracy is slow. Dictatorships are fast.

1984 here we go...

Amazing explanatory video! Thanks team EU made simple❤

I like the idea of a Single European State. As far as the choice of government is concerned, I have another idea: Each Union state has its own president/chancellor. These representatives of the Union states are in the Union Council. There are also various parties that are elected across Europe and are thus elected to the Union Parliament. There is also a State Council in each Union State, which consists of representatives from the individual provinces of a Union State. The government then works like this: The Union Council elects a chairman (usually the President of France or the German Chancellor), the Union Parliament elects the Union President and the provincial councils elect a council chairman for each state, these state council chairmen then sit in the Union Provincial Council, which elects the Union Province chairman. These 3 people - the Union Council President, the Union President and the Union Provincial President - are the decision makers. First, the legislative proposals must be voted on by Parliament and when Parliament votes for a law, the 3 decision-makers must vote on the law again among themselves (all 3 must agree) and only then does it become a law. If the 3 vote against it, there will be a second vote in Parliament. If the three are still against it, Parliament can vote a third time and if it still votes for it, the decision-makers must give their consent. This all sounds complicated at first, but it's not that bad. This just ensures that no one gets too much power in a unified union. Of course, this makes legislation work more slowly, which is why things like education, drugs, infrastructure and land use are decided at the state level. I agree with everything you said about the Union level a year ago, but I would add a few things. So the finances should be distributed at the Union level and the distributed finances should be managed by the individual states. Social benefits such as pensions, citizens' benefits and minimum wages should be uniform throughout the Union. The energy is controlled at the center by the Union, but like finances, it is distributed among the states. Same with economics. Trade at international level only passes through the Union. It gets complicated militarily. The (probably) best solution is that there is a Union army, which consists of the armies of the individual Union states. Each Union state has its own army and is, at least theoretically, allowed to go to war against another Union state, even if that would have enormous consequences. Again, Union states are not allowed to independently declare war against another independent country, as it would then be a war by the Union against another country. Each country must commit half of its army to the Union Army, with that half still belonging to the state army. If there is a war within the Union, neither other Union states nor the Union itself may intervene militarily. At the end of a war, negotiations take place as between two independent states, with the Union being allowed to impose consequences afterwards, such as the entry of the entire state army into the permanent Union army. If there are any further questions, please feel free to ask. Maybe I'll make it into my own video with my ideas. Because even though I'm a video editor by profession, I don't feel like creating a new channel.

Wow, hope you guys can make it, luv from🇹🇷

It is always a pleasure to collaborate with this channel. Thank you EU Made Simple

As European, I don't think that those presented changes are, while it could be an improvement, are ideal. For example while shift to bicameral system is good, the fact that one chamber will be consisting of only indirectly elected or appointed members, as I understand, is too far from being Ideal. I think that we should have this "senate" bit larger with all the PMs (or their emissaries) and then elected representatives from each state, or rather regions. E.g. every 5 million people would mean 1 senator. And maybe we should grant several "honorary" seats. For example for heads of microstates and/or for heads of EU-wide religions. E.g. Pope, patriarch of Constantinople etc. I think it would be great idea to Include representatives of communities that are not defined by borders. The naming convention is still terrible, I would say. On the other hand having head of executive "chosen" in similar way as PMs are, is step in right direction. I would say. I don't think that transferring Biodiversity and Environmental issues to exclusively EU things is good idea. If they will make too rapid steps or steps that would be in bad direction, it would mess whole EU instead of single country. As well I think that all stuff regarding national parks and other such areas still should remain in power of member countries and possibly be transferred from central level to some lower levels, like regions. This proposals will as well face pushback from certain governments, so some concessions would have to be made. But I don't think that they would happen that much in first group of reforms, but the third will most likely not pass.

Amazingly explained thanks

"I am too old to understand this" make me cry 🤣🤣🤣

Eww, after 1000years of struggling for autonomy we're supposed to give it up? Thats foolish.

The EU should just degrade to a purely economic union, it has outgrown its purpose. A federation of Europe simply would not work, and the centralization and increasing of EU competnecies leads to Brussels calling for major changes in countries while not knowing the economic situation in them. The benefits are to few and the the problems are to many.

I'm praying for this to work!

Veto's can be annoying and seemingly destructive. But it depends on who you think should run your country, your own national government or the EU. I believe my country should be run from my capital and if there is anything that we do not want be part of, we can Veto it. In fact i think removing the Veto will be a very bad move for they EU in the long run, as the citizens of most nations are not ok with their national parliaments being overruled. Do you see yourself as a european citizen before your nationality?

Treaty of Maastricht 1992 Treaty of Lisbon 2007 We need a new treaty.

Some of these changes are quite concerning, removing the ability to veto certain laws, while it could remove situations like countries holding up the council, it also means countries can now be bullied by a simple majority, this could easily lead to the formation of larger factions inside of the EU which will only make things worse.

EU needs to start protecting EU. That's the thing that matters. Western civilization is under attack. Barbarians are at the gate, or inside. We can discuss economics after our existential threat has been resolved.

This will never pass and that is a good thing, smaller EU-countries should not and will not give up their veto rights.

very very very good

People will never be ready to give away the independence that their fathers fought for with their lives. Hell i can see that this federation idea could cause an continent wide civil war and no one wants that! So it's better to try to make EU purely an trade union. We already have NATO for those who want to bolster their security.

the countries have joined a union where every country’s vote matters, now they say if you’re too small you have to obey to the rest, it’s a radical change to EU also giving the environment authority to EU & making education a shared responsibility between EU and the country sound like awful measures it can be a major step to implement EU-wide education as propaganda tool, then use some climate scoring to manipulate developing countries, then use this new voting mechanism to enforce EU-wide high taxes controlled by digital euro if that happens that would be the end of EU, unfortunately, let’s enjoy Europe we know now I hope Poland and Hungary will never let those measures to be implemented

so basically eu federation throught back doors.... typical eu..... if u want federation do europe wide referedum.... but u know it would not pass ....

I think that the before taking decisions on reforms, we should first address the economic differences between the EU countries and even them. We should first achieve economic unity, also by introducing euro to all EU countries and including all EU countries in the Schengen area (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Ireland and Romania). I also think that we should resolve the Schengen area issues with illegal immigration, because right now border controls are back and with no common immigration policy inside the Schengen area and outer border control we won't be able to ensure free flow of people inside the EU. Without coherent economic stability across all EU countries, political reforms should be postponed. Only then smaller EU countries might agree to give up their veto right, to create a European federal government and to give up majority of state competencies.

The "More EU Competencies" part will be where it fails. No matter how much sense it makes, some politicians just have the stance of losing competencies = bad

To quote the Hound: fucking hope not.

I CAN NOT SEE THIS WRKING

The European common wealth will rise.

A very interesting issue! I think that voting with the majority is the only right way! I hope that my country will also become a member of a united Europe) 🇪🇺

Aaaand there comes what most people have been afraid of: Instead of a United Europe, it's becoming a United States of Europe.

How did the public demand these changes? Oh I thought not.

I dream of a Europe where/with: - Presidents and representatives are chosen by the people's vote, without 'electoral colleges' and without non elected oversight bodies with a big chunk of the decision power in their hands - Representation follows a proportional method, with no veto mechanisms but incorporating QMVs in some key points for stability - Monetary and customs policies cater to everyone, with balanced mechanisms to support regions where the Euro might not be suitable yet - A coherent border policy across all states, sharing efforts fairly for both internal and external migrations instead of relying that only a few countries will shoulder everything - Commitment to the economic convergence of poorer countries, abandoning selfish approaches that impose 'lessons' on struggling economies. - Strong anti-"tax haven" policies, departing from the current hypocritical situation where each country has its own, and ensuring Schengen space doesn't extend to countries like Switzerland unless they follow the same rules.. - Increased discussion, scrutiny, and coverage of the EU Parliament's proceedings, combating the prevalent 'I don't care' attitude that leads to over 90% voter abstention in some countries - Transparent institutions with no room for lobbying or secretive agreements, fostering greater openness overall - A Union grounded in shared humanistic values, not in economic convenience and not in inflation rates - A military alliance less reliant on the US yet without the delusion of being the world's police force with megalomaniac budgets - A united, free and independent voice in the world that would have relevancy and weight to be heard and not this fragmented mess that no one respects because of the lack of economical, political, military and demographic significance Apologies for taking up your time; I was just dreaming...

Worst proposal EU could ever have, strongly against the idea since i first heard it 3 years ago. This is just a power-move for more control over countries.

if you take right of some member states, this will be just empowerment of anti-EU movements, i think this will either be end of EU, or split into EU and other union, as i am Slovak, i cannot trust politicians from other countries to share slovak values and interests in decision making...

Maybe we should agree first on what "common European values" are before we sanction member states for not sharing them. And just because Germany and France share a set of values doesn't mean they should be forced onto other member states. We had western imperialism already, no need to force your cultural values on others.

I like the idea of merging the roles of Commission President and Council President. Having the Executive represented within the Council places the hypothetical Union President (and therefore the Union itself) in the same category as the other leaders of Europe and their nations. It's a potent statement that the European Union is a legitimate political entity and truly an emerging nation. Although I'm not European, hearing about the steady evolution of the European experiment fills me with optimism. Europe's success is an encouragement to the world, and a testament of how far supranational cooperation can get us. I hope someday my part of the world will follow her example, but something tells me that the Indo-Pacific is a long way from coming together nicely. P.S. They *really* need to think of a name change with that EU + European Council thing. Maybe change the EU Council to the Senate, but that change might make anti-federalists squeamish.

Vetos should not be removed. If simple majority can make major decisions for all EU supercedes independence of the nations. Eu is not and in my opinion should not be a nation and should not supercede independence of member. It ahould be union of independent nations participating voluntarily and beinf subject to legislation they too have agreed on. If that makes decisionmaking slow then so be it. Independent nations can make faster moves then in case of emergencies. Just because something would make something easier, faster and more convenient for EU or majority of EU leaders does not make it right or better.

Maybe a video on Volt Europa could also show how a paneuropean party is pushing for a federal EU

EU-wide referendums. What exactly? How? Widen the EU competencies. Why? No! The EU Parliament is undemocratic. The vote of a German citizen for an MEP is nothing compared to the ones from small countries. Why has the number of MEPs been increased (not Germany). It should have been reduced. There is no access of EU citizens to the EU-court in Luxembourg. National courts most times reject. The EU Parl Petition Committee does not deliver. The EU Ombudsman Emilia O'Reilly, she does not do her job (with Cecilia Wikström it would have been a disaster). She did not care about action against member states when they violated EU law (Infringement proceedings). Each nation - as Denmark - should have the right to vote out. Is Norway, UK, Switzerland etc involved in this? One of the biggest lies is saying the EU administration is cheap. All the EU farm subsidies are managed and paid from the national states.

These guys are corrupt, massively corrupt.

Good proposals! It’ll defiantly move the EU forward🇪🇺! Think 15-20 commissioners would be a good idea, but think the European Parliment should nominate the president of the commision, just like a prime minister and have an administratively role - Would be a good idea for the European council to nominate President for the whole EU though🇪🇺. The President should represent the EU and connect the Europeans! * The EU should also consider having a union district, -just like Washington D.C.-, to collect all the institutions one place. Near the Alsace region would be a perfect location for this due to its history and geographic center of Europe🌍!

this won't pass, as soon as you want to remove single veto, that story falls appart

Nice!

start to redo the 2005 referendum, and then enforce the decision of WE THE PEOPLE !!,

If this comes to frution (which I highly doubt), I hope my country and a lot of other smaller nations have the self respect to leave, especially in regards to veto.

I really love the fact that this change will grant the EU powers to make laws and regulations governing the educational, cultural and other aspects of 27 DIFFERENT CULTURES.. yes, this trully will bring unity - this is sarcasm - .. Back in the day I though the UK were stupid to exit.. I am starting to see their point.

System works, no need to mess with it

Great video

qualified majority will always mean the will of big countries. because small ones have less representatives in parliament. and what about council? two major questions are: 1) how does votes will count in a counsel? does all countries have one vote. or big countries will have more? 2) are these changes will have to be approved in referendums in every country? because this is not what citizens voted for when joining the union. if contract is changed, then it should be reapproved in a democracy. i hope that in this canal are competent people who can answer those questions.

Please do a follow up video when the deadline is reached, it would be cool to know what happened

Thank you for the informative video

NO to Union, NO to federalization, Europe is a continent, not a nation

Your enthusiasm when discussing a European Federation ruins any trust I had in you to fairly report on the topic. You can support a European Federation but to sound so biased just destroys your credibility.

The harder and most important change is removing the veto. Even a 2/3 voting system is better. Removing the veto paves the way for all other changes.

Thank you

Moreover, if we want to carry out such reforms, we need to ask all citizens in referendums whether they agree to the federalization of the EU, because no one agreed to such a thing when the countries joined the EU. Additionally, some EU institutions should be transferred to the V4 countries because, as you can see, Western countries are too weak.

This would be maybe the biggest changes on the continent in the last few decades. I'm strongly for it. Even if everything is not in the final version. Scraping the veto would be such a victory not only for the EU, but I would say for all members in the long run. I think that many of the 10 members can be convinced to vote for it, but for a couple it will be difficult. Thank you EU made simple for helping make a federal more connected Europe!!!!

So the proposal passed the EU parliament, when is it going for the EU council ?

yeah no chance in hell for unanimity, so it's going to die there

Federal Europe was voted down n several referendums in EU. This talk needs to stop. EU is not a state. EU is an alliance.

Amazing channel, thank you!

More waste of money while Europeans struggle

Amazing view❤❤❤

I am firmly Against removing Veto Rights from EU Member Countries! The Fact that EU Member Countries have Veto Rights is a VERY Important Democratic Institution! The EU must be an Confederation, not a Federation!