Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
EU Government Politics

Swedish Pirate Party Member To Be EU's Youngest MP 152

Posted by timothy
from the jumping-the-queue dept.
First time accepted submitter genjix writes "In a few weeks Amelia Andersdotter will be the second Pirate Party member to take a seat at the European Parliament in Brussels. The 24-year-old Swede was voted in more than two years ago, but due to bureaucratic quibbles her official appointment was delayed. TorrentFreak catches up with the soon-to-be youngest MEP to hear about her plans and expectations."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Swedish Pirate Party Member To Be EU's Youngest MP

Comments Filter:
  • by Chrisq (894406)
    I wouldn't mind raising the jolly rodger up her!
  • Only 24? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by smi.james.th (1706780) on Monday November 21, 2011 @05:01AM (#38122066)

    24 years old is very young to be in any parliament... That's how old I am!

    I wish her luck. Hopefully the concept can spread around the world, the current copyright situation is quite crazy as it stands.

    • Re:Only 24? (Score:4, Funny)

      by TheReaperD (937405) on Monday November 21, 2011 @05:06AM (#38122086)

      That's how old I am!

      Get off my lawn, you damn kids!

    • Re:Only 24? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21, 2011 @05:11AM (#38122108)

      Lots of European countries have very young MPs in national parliaments. The Minister of Taxes in Denmark is 26. The youngest MP in Denmark is 20.

      • Lots of European countries have very young MPs in national parliaments. The Minister of Taxes in Denmark is 26. The youngest MP in Denmark is 20.

        Pitt the Even Younger has those guys beat by more than a decade. Mind you he didn't actually win the Dunny-on-the-Wold byelection, so technically he never ended up as an MP...

    • Re:Only 24? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21, 2011 @05:20AM (#38122132)

      Canada has younger (19!); thanks to Quebec's recent purge of the Liberals/PQ, several "no hope of being voted in at all" candidates from the NDP got in.

    • Some 70+ year old politicians act like immature teenagers so age doesn't worry me in the least.

  • Naysayers say nay (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Rogerborg (306625) on Monday November 21, 2011 @05:42AM (#38122200) Homepage
    Quick precis for those who don't know: MEPs are essentially non-entities. All EU legislation is created by the Commission, made up of unelected political appointees from Member States. Since they don't know anything about the issues that they actually legislate, they farm out the task of actually writing laws to expert consultants - read, lobbyists.

    After six or seven rounds of rubberstamping, the new Directive is put before the actual "Parliament", where MEPs can vote yea or nea, or just not show up in the hope that it will pass and they can plead ignorant neutrality. If they vote nea, it goes through the committee system a few more times so that some of the more deliberately egregious clauses can be elided. Honour satisfied, the Directive is duly passed in the form that the lobbyist really wanted, and Member States can begin the process of (mis)implementing it, or in the case of anyone South or East of Belgium, shrugging their shoulders and simply ignoring it.

    And that's how democracy works.

    • by ShakaUVM (157947)

      After six or seven rounds of rubberstamping, the new Directive is put before the actual "Parliament", where MEPs can vote yea or nea, or just not show up in the hope that it will pass and they can plead ignorant neutrality. If they vote nea, it goes through the committee system a few more times so that some of the more deliberately egregious clauses can be elided. Honour satisfied, the Directive is duly passed in the form that the lobbyist really wanted, and Member States can begin the process of (mis)imple

      • by Pope (17780)

        The US Government was described as a "three ring circus," I think the EU would take more than 2 minutes to describe!

        • by gmhowell (26755)

          The US Government was described as a "three ring circus," I think the EU would take more than 2 minutes to describe!

          But why does each ring have a bunch of clowns?

    • by Teun (17872) on Monday November 21, 2011 @06:07AM (#38122278) Homepage
      You are an uneducated idiot or troll, may be both.

      Why would the commission need be made up out of elected members when you can get better people that are not necessarily political connected? See the present Italian government.
      In many European countries the democratic process means the parliament gets elected and they appoint and control the government.
      In case of the EU commission it is appointed by the democratically controlled governments of the member states and since fairly recent the EU parliament can approve or even veto policies as proposed by the commission.

      Of course it would be better when the EU parliament had full democratic rights like introducing their own proposals or amendments but the UK and France have always and are still opposing to such an idea.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Why would the commission need be made up out of elected members when you can get better people that are not necessarily political connected? See the present Italian government.

        You mean the one in which the European Commission just turfed out the democratically elected Prime Minister and replaced him with a Goldman Sachs stooge? That Italian government? Following quick on the heals of rolling the leader of the Greek government (for the high crime of proposing to put the people's future to a vote by, you

        • Re:Naysayers say nay (Score:4, Interesting)

          by antientropic (447787) on Monday November 21, 2011 @08:56AM (#38122940)

          You mean the one in which the European Commission just turfed out the democratically elected Prime Minister and replaced him with a Goldman Sachs stooge? That Italian government? Following quick on the heals of rolling the leader of the Greek government (for the high crime of proposing to put the people's future to a vote by, you know, the people) and replacing him with another European central banker?

          You're seriously misinformed or just trolling. The European Commission did no such thing - in fact, they have been relatively absent in the entire debt crisis. You could argue that Merkozy got rid of Papandreou and Berlusconi, but that's rather dubious as well: Papandreou did himself in by calling for a referendum (a stupid unilateral move that was rightly met with condemnation from the other EU states; should you organise a referendum when your house is on fire?) and then reversing course a few days later, while Berlusconi (finally!) lost his majority in parliament. Governments fall all the time - I don't see what's undemocratic here.

          • by tehcyder (746570)

            Papandreou did himself in by calling for a referendum (a stupid unilateral move that was rightly met with condemnation from the other EU states; should you organise a referendum when your house is on fire?)

            Curiously, Greece is still there, their house hasn't burned down.

      • by silanea (1241518)

        Why would the commission need be made up out of elected members when you can get better people that are not necessarily political connected?

        I challenge you to name one single person in the commission who is not "politically connected". Just one. And that does not even touch the question of whether they are "better".

        To those who modded Teun insightful: Please spend a few minutes on a search engine of your choice and see for yourself just how good the commission is.

        • Officials working in the Commission have all passed hard selection tests, in which the average number of candidates per post are in the 100s to 1. They are thoroughly checked on professional knowledge, languages spoken, work experience and ethics. Trust me, the lucky few who eventually get a job are very, very bright people worth their salt.

          Can you say that much about your average MP? Where I come from, the Parliament is composed of:

          a) medical-grade morons (25 - 35 %)
          b) thieves and con men (the bulk)
          c) know

          • by jonbryce (703250)

            The civil servants may be good, but I'm not so sure about the actual commissioners who make the decisions. Previous British commissioners include Neil Kinnock, who was Vice President, and Peter Mandelslime. Both of them were failed politicians at Westminster.

          • by silanea (1241518)

            So this incredibly effective screening process must be why a whole College of Commissioners was forced to resign over charges of fraud and corruption [wikipedia.org] which led to the founding of the European Anti-Fraud Office. Right. The best of the best of the best, SIR!

            But, for fairness' sake, let us take a look at the current College:

            José Manuel Barroso [wikipedia.org], President
            Professional politician, holding national offices since at least 1985.
            Catherine Ashton [wikipedia.org], Vice President
            Professional politician, holding national offic
      • by Kjella (173770) on Monday November 21, 2011 @07:50AM (#38122646) Homepage

        It's not a secret that the commission has been ripe for lobbyists, particularly before the parliament got their veto right with the Lisbon treaty in 2009. But it really comes down to the EU being in a half-state between a trade alliance and a federation. Is it an alliance of nations or does it want a European parliament like Congress and a federal government, with federal law, federal taxes, and federal economic policy? Let me tell you there's a vast opposition to that, not just in the UK and France. Even though the EU is expanding to cover more and more areas, for the most part it has to work through the national governments. If there's a top level meeting on education, it's the 27 ministers of education not an EU Department of Education. Despite the talk of an EU military force, there are 27 national militaries. There are 27 ministers on foreign policy who each keep their own ties to other nations and so on. And that is also why the EU passes directives, while the 27 national assemblies passes laws.

        I mean, yes they could do away with that and pretty much become the United States of Europe. One parliament that makes law directly from Brussels on their own. It'd be democratic, as the EU parliament is democratically chosen. Some say all the important things are already decided there, but there's a difference between keeping the appearance of national governance and openly admitting that the EU is running the whole show. That is why most directives have optional components, so the national governments can pretend to have a say even though all the essential parts are required. And I say this coming from Norway, a non-EU member that's passed every EU directive since 1994 and is now maybe considering veto'ing our first. And of all the crappy directives they could have picked they chose a poor one, but at this point I just want to know what happens if we don't just bend over and take it.

        • the real problem is that this "half-state" gives you the worst of both sides...so we should go forward and have more integration and a simpler system with one central parliament... mond
        • by olau (314197)

          You're right about the trade alliance. In fact, it's my impression that EU is mostly about trade laws, consumer protection and giving money to support local development and cross-European research, although the euro necessarily has some requirements on the economies of the member states. With Greece it's obvious now why those requirements are necessary. And of course there's some foreign policy involved too since it makes sense to gang up when you're trying to strong-arm other countries.

          But the EU doesn't r

    • by Hentes (2461350) on Monday November 21, 2011 @06:51AM (#38122422)

      This is how in was in the past, but in the last few years the EP has managed to grab most of the power. Now the Commission is elected by them, making them the most powerful.

      • Nom the EU commission still has alot more clout then the EP parlament. The EU parlament is basically toothless with little power.

        In the end the EU parlament, over 99% of the time, affirm the EU commissions directives. The EU parlament can get some minor changes in - but thats all.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Tosh!
      The Commission drafts the legislation, then depending the legal domain, it will follow a predefined route as specified in the (Lisbon) Treaty. Most legal domains use the Co-Decision process by which the Council (comprising all EU Members and chaired by the member holding the rotating presidency) will first address technical details (civil servant technical experts from the members), as the legislation matures it moves through the Council's committees until the Council and Parliament can negotiation dir

      • by mmcuh (1088773)

        "Considerable poser" - now that's Freudian...

        Yes, formally the parliament can change and even reject directives, but we all know what happens in the end. Remember SWIFT?

  • Savviness (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21, 2011 @06:48AM (#38122412)

    I think this is the first time I've read an article on copyright/patent/trademark law, consisting mostly of the words of a particular politician, and thought to myself: Hey, this person knows more than I do about the subject. Like, a lot more.

    • by brit74 (831798)
      Really? Because I read the article and she hardly said anything at all about copyright/patent/trademark law. Most of her comments were about nationalism versus the EU.

      The only two paragraphs about copyright/patent/trademark law are:
      “I’m also very interested in industrial rights, like, patent rights or design rights, trademarks. There’s an abundance of kind of side-initiatives, data exclusivity in the pharmaceutical industry being a good example, that also reinforce the ‘non-ma
    • by kiwimate (458274)

      She does seem to have a fair amount of knowledge there, as you'd expect. I read up on the Pirate Party (WIkipedia, their site, etc.) and I can tell what they stand for in terms of copyright, piracy, etc.

      So, next question for me is:

      How's she going to handle the current economic crisis in Europe? Because that's a much bigger impact and far more urgent.

      What about the terrorism crises going on that threaten various countries in the EU? What's her/the Pirate Party's position?

      Energy platform? What do they think a

      • by Andy_R (114137)

        On your first 6 questions, it's likely that she'll sit with the existing green block, and leverage voting with them on these issues to gain backing on key Pirate issues. On corruption, the Pirate Party movement was founded on 4 key issues, one of which is Government openness, so you can expect a her to expose a lot of what goes on behind closed doors at the EU.

        I understand why you think we're all about copyright, as that's the issue where we get the vast majority of our press coverage, but we also have a lo

  • be positive! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21, 2011 @07:11AM (#38122504)

    I think it is much more important, that if she starts with 24 and is good and clever enough could be someone - if she grows up - who has a great impact on the european politic, just like the other young politicians, MEPs, MPs, PP members and so on - which I would really welcome

    • by Krneki (1192201)

      I think it is much more important, that if she starts with 24 and is good and clever enough could be someone - if she grows up - who has a great impact on the european politic, just like the other young politicians, MEPs, MPs, PP members and so on - which I would really welcome

      Politicians are like diapers, you need to change them often and for the same reason.

  • I hate how some issues are so polarising.

    "Piracy" shouldn't be a platform. Nor should allowing theft of intellectual rights.

    That said- current laws are ludicrous and publishers have more rights than they should.

    The current system of copyright, patents, etc is completely broken and needs losening up a lot. We should resist swinging the complete opposite direction though.

    Like many issues- the best course is somewhere between what we have now and what the extremists on the other side want.

    Yes, if I buy some

    • by Anonymous Coward

      It's not extreme at all:

      There's simply no concept of "intellectual rights". It is something that was made up and the carved into your head.

      Since they don't exist, by definition they can't be 'stolen'.

      Disclainmer: 20 yo and active member of the Brazilian Pirate Party.

      • by tehcyder (746570)

        There's simply no concept of "intellectual rights". It is something that was made up and the carved into your head.

        All "rights" are made up and agreed by people.

    • by Oswald McWeany (2428506) on Monday November 21, 2011 @11:55AM (#38124666)

      I can only see one line of the above response and cannot open it to reply due to Slashdots ongoing UI bugs.

      However- I would like to point out that saying:
      "there is no intellectual property" IS an extreme position. That IS the extreme.

      You may believe that to be true and that may be your stance-- but that is an extreme position- doesn't mean it is wrong- but it is extreme. You can't go any more unregulated than that in terms of IP.

      Personally- I think taking a non-extreme approach is best to foster creativity and consumer happiness. Yes, people should be rewarded for their creativity and have it somewhat protected.

      I shouldn't be allowed to profit off someone elses hardwork. However- I do recognise that the current laws need relaxing considerably.

      As for intellectual property being an "artificial" law.

      Yes, exactly- just as all laws and rules are. Just as child abuse is "artificially" illegal- or laws of consent, doesn't mean it should be made legal. Most people would argue they shouldn't- and I agree.

      Physical property is equally "artificial" too. Caveman one crafts an arrowhead. Caveman two comes along- clubs caveman one on the head and steals arrowhead.

      Without government artificially coming along and saying theft is wrong- it isn't. Our entire legal system is "artificial". Most people would not want to live in anarchy though. I want it to be wrong to club someone over the head to steal their property- I wouldn't want to live in a world where theft of physical property were legal.

      I also wouldn't want to live in a world where anyone could profit from my intellectual hardwork and I not get paid anything.

      There needs to be a balance. Currently it is too far in favour of the creator than the consumer- but we shouldn't abolish IP outright.

    • by tehcyder (746570)

      The current system of copyright, patents, etc is completely broken and needs losening up a lot.

      Well done, I think that's thei first time I've seen the loose/lose confusion go the other way.

The way to make a small fortune in the commodities market is to start with a large fortune.

Working...