Comment by nickslaughter02

12 hours ago

> EPP voted against both

EPP wanted indiscriminate scanning instead, not targeted one (the goal of the amendments).

16 comments

nickslaughter02

Reply
freehorse  12 hours ago

So they voted against the total because it did not include indiscriminate scanning? I am not saying this is not the case, but it does not make sense to me. If indiscriminate scanning does not pass, why not vote for the total even without it, and amend it after it passes and gets normalised at a later point?

  • layer8  12 hours ago

    It would have locked in the restrictions, which would be difficult to argue later that they should be removed and the package be opened up again. Without any scanning, it’s much easier to continue arguing that indiscriminate scanning is needed. They remain in a much stronger bargaining position towards those who want limited scanning (as opposed to no scanning) than if they had conceded.

    • btilly  12 hours ago

      Exactly. It is much easier to get people to agree to do questionable things, when there is pressure to "do something".

      A more limited bill takes off the pressure to "do something", and therefore makes the more extreme bill harder to pass later.

      In this case there is reason to suspect that the real goal of the bill is not catching pedophiles. Instead it is to give police broader powers of surveillance in the name of catching pedophiles, which they will then be able to use for other purposes. This is particularly problematic given the ways that it could be abused by some of the more authoritarian governments in the EU. Yes, I'm thinking of Viktor Orbán of Hungary.

      11 replies →

  • gpderetta  12 hours ago

    That's happens often in parliamentary proceedings: when the other party succeeds in unrecognizably amending the law, the party proposing it will vote against.

    Specifically for the European Parliament, this is also why, while it is true it doesn't have the power of legislative initiative, given the ability to amend at will any "law", in practice it doesn't make much of a difference.