EU Data Protection Proposal Taken Word For Word From US Lobbyists 108
Qedward writes "Glyn Moody looks at the proposed EU directive on Data Protection — and how some of the proposed amendments seem to be cut and pasted directly from the American Chamber of Commerce — that well-known European organisation... You might ask, Glyn writes, who are these MEPs representing — some 500 million EU citizens that pay their salary or a bunch of extremely rich U.S. companies intent on taking away our privacy?"
Lobbyplag lets you look at which lobbyist wrote each part of the bill. Fears of the U.S. exerting undue influence seem to be justified.
nonsense! (Score:2)
Re:nonsense! (Score:5, Funny)
Mr Tulip looked down at the departing coach
'From what I hear he mostly doesn't do a --ing thing!' he complained
'Yeah,' said M. Pin smoothly. 'One of the hardest things to do properly in Politics'
Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
Imagine the outrage in the US if Chinese or European groups drafted a law for congress.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Someone should produce a Zero Dollar note for the USA and a Zero Euro note for the EU :)
Re: (Score:2)
For Euros use the drop down box on the left and select a country from the Euro zone eg. France, Germany, Italy, Greece *cough*
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine the outrage in the US if Chinese or European groups drafted a law for congress.
Why would anyone care? A proposed law should be judged on its merits, not its origin.
Re: (Score:1)
in general yes, just it happens that when proposal arrives from external source, it more fits external source needs and not local.
Re: (Score:1)
Imagine the outrage in the US if Chinese or European groups drafted a law for congress.
Personally, I think there's nothing the people in the US could do about it now anyhow. If their "representatives" want to do something like that, they will. And they'll justify it to the people they "represent" in some twisted "in order to serve you better" way (which is "political code" talk for "there's nothing you can do about it").
Re: (Score:2)
Odd (Score:4, Interesting)
In US, lobbyists are the guys (officially) donating money to the candidate (which is, sadly, allowed). But I don't believe that such "donations" are allowed in EU.
So what does it even mean "US lobbyist" here? Isn't simply giving money to MEPs illegal??
Re:Odd (Score:4, Interesting)
What if the money happens to fall in to their US bank account, the one they didn't tell anyone they had?
Re: (Score:1)
What if the money happens to fall in to their US bank account, the one they didn't tell anyone they had?
Then the fact that these are "lobbyist" is an unproven allegation. US lobbyists (typically) document their donations. If this is not allowed in EU then either
a. The authors of this website have evidence of illegal activity perpetrated by these "lobbyists" (illegally giving money to MEPs to influence their decision)
b. They are pretty much guessing without knowing who may have paid how much money. Is the list of lobbyist-suggested changes a leak or also published? Couldn't tell from the article...
Re: (Score:2)
The lobbyists, being based in the US are not doing anything illegal. It is the MEPs who would be breaking the law by accepting the money.
Re:Odd (Score:4, Insightful)
That's why the MEPs don't accept the 'donations'. Instead they sell something to the lobbyist for 1000% of it's value.
Re: (Score:3)
The lobbyists, being based in the US are not doing anything illegal.
It is a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act [wikipedia.org] to bribe any government official, anywhere in the world.
Re:Odd (Score:5, Interesting)
[Disclaimer: I worked in the field.]
Ever heard of social engineering? Political social engineering?
Bribery is for schmucks. Losers who are too stupid to do actual lobbying.
The whole point of lobbyism is that it isn't bribery (but social engineering).
It's called "designed reality". A politician will have nothing but meetings with interest groups and about certain topics. Those meetings will be filled with practically only social engineers, who tell the politicians whatever they want him to believe, so he acts like they want him to. To the politician, this becomes his perceived reality. (That's why it doesn't matter even if it's the green or pirate party... they will all get sucked up into the designed reality.)
The common notion that there would be an absolute reality, and such a thing as "facts", strengthens their belief in the distorted view. They will defend it as "fact" and "reality" to their death. (I bet even you want to defend this right now, don't you?)
"donations"... pfft. lol.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Odd (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow, that's one heck of a conspiracy theory.
It's not a theory. Several lobbyist in the past was describing precisely such practices.
"Social engineering" sounds to me bit off, too glorified. I used to call it "conditioning" (the Neuro Associative Conditioning [wikispaces.com] seems to be the common term). It is pretty well known set of practices from the NLP [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
(I bet even you want to defend this right now, don't you?)
You lot the bet because I am a rationalist.
What was your wager, again?
Oh, well played... Well played indeed.
I only perceived a reality in which you had made a bet. You've not lost your slimy touch.
Re: (Score:1)
Sadly this is true
[Disclaimer: I work on the other side, sorta...]
And it isn't even that hard. Often a Congressional staffer needs to research several topics with 48 hour notice (say, before a hearing or vote). They could go to Google and try and do it themselves, or they just call the most relevant Special Interest group about topic X. In 24 hours, the staffer gets a nice color/multimedia briefing on topic X from the lobbyist's point of view. This becomes the only data point they have and sets the real
Re: (Score:2)
Judging by the way things work in the UK, it's more of a case of "You look out for my interests now, I look out for your interests in the future".
Certainly you see a lot of politicians and top regulators who are friendly to the interests of Financial Institutions in the City of London who retire to exceptionally well paid positions in said Financial Institutions.
This is how it works in the UK and, in all appearences, in the US: there are no laws regulating conflict of interests, so it's extremelly common fo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Odd (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Either that, or this is the real reason so many countries turn a blind eye to havens, where income including bribes is never declared.
Re: (Score:2)
You are giving politicians (and the lobbyist) in Europe too much credit. There are still a lot of shady financial transactions going on there. See for instance the scandal leading up to the resignation of Christian Wulff last year.
I wouldn't be surprised if the MEPs were receiving more than just sweet words from the publishing lobby
Re: (Score:2)
Anyway, lobbyist money only succeeds in the presence of public apathy. If the voters don't give a shit that US businesses are writing their laws, no law concerning lobbyist
Ho Hum (Score:1)
Welcome to the global economy, Skippy. What makes international graft and influence peddling any different from the common domestic kind? Is the EU so ethically superior to the US, Russia, or China?
Re:Ho Hum (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Things have been framed as 'government vs corporations' by both government and corporations, because when people buy into that line of bullshit then they blame the corporations instead of the government, which results in nothing ever changing. The reality is that its 'government and corporations vs the people' and this is only possible because the politicians enable it.
Throw 'em out! (Score:2)
It's hard to get rid of the lobbyists, but at least you should be able to get rid of the corrupt MEPs who listen to them.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And who will you have to replace them?
And how long will they stand aginst the epic tide of money and power?
Every man has his price... And these large companies can meet it. Money? Power? Fame? Women? Men? Drugs?
Anything.
Legal or illegal.... What.... they can and have done it all in the past... what makes now any different?
And those that cant be bought have 'accidents'. Or someone claims they raped them and there goes their support.
Re: (Score:3)
It's hard to get rid of the lobbyists, but at least you should be able to get rid of the corrupt MEPs who listen to them.
And who will you have to replace them?
With corrupt MEPs who listen to me instead of course!
Re:Throw 'em out! (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Anything you do between elections to influence members of the parliament is lobbying. Do you really want to get rid of that?
Um, when that lobbying is for the benefit of a single multinational corporation instead of the greater good of the people served by the legislature - then yes, I absolutely want to get rid of that.
Re: (Score:2)
What you've done here is construct a straw-man argument. The conventional definition of a lobbyist is someone who is employed to persuade legislators to vote for legislation that favors the lobbyist's employer. By bringing up the origin of the word and pretending that I was arguing against that, you have defeated an argument that only existed in your own twisted mind.
MEP elections (Score:5, Informative)
I have no idea of how you guys elect your MEPs, but at least in Finland we have many people from all parties running for the EU parliament. I can vote for any of them. It's true that parties do use the EU parliament as a dumping ground for old politicians, but the lists always contain new names also and I choose who I vote for.
So, maybe you need to vote for some other party or reform the voting in your own country instead?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Same in the UK. The European parliamentary constituencies are larger than national parliamentary constituencies, so a MEP will represent many more people. In the European vote I have a choice of candidates, normally one from each of the main parties and possibly the occasional independent. I can't recall my choice from the last one now but I think it was 5 or 6 candidates. In comparison local government and national parliament elections offer a choice from about 7 to 12 candidates depending on how many sin
Re: (Score:3)
So, maybe you need to vote for some other party or reform the voting in your own country instead?
Indeed.
UK voters should note that all four MEPs mentioned in TFA are from the Conservative Party, and vote accordingly for the other lizards in the future.
Re:ONE MORE REASON TO KILL THE EUROPEAN UNION NOW (Score:5, Insightful)
If everyone can found his own party and even get elected to the European Parliament (look at the swedish Pirate Party!), there is no point to go through the primaries of two big parties. Just cut out the middleman and get your own election platform! You try to turn a sad necessity of the congealed U.S. two party system into something of an advantage.
Re: (Score:2)
"primaries" = getting enough names to get the right to get as a candidate on the vote. and it's not that hard. in finland you need 2000 names on a list and off you go as candidate.
the primaries in USA are a joke btw. could just hold the real election with the same trouble.
Re: (Score:1)
The EU needs to go back to its economic cooperation origins and drop the attempts to establish a political dictatorship completely. Such as it is, it's a disgraceful spectacle on so many levels.
Re: (Score:3)
Take the UK, (the) most developed countries in the EU follow the guidelines set by the Working Hours Directive, for the well-being of the workforce (~=population) an employee is allowed to work a maximum of 48 hrs. per week.
The UK Tories try all in their power to get exempted from it because "it's damaging to the economy"...
Yet the Germans that adhere rigorously have economic growth while the British economy sh
Fears of the US *government* erxerting ... (Score:4, Interesting)
US citizens don't want this either. As a German, I say, it's not right to blame them too. Yes, there's a pathetic passivity when it comes to rising up and saying no. But are we sure we wouldn't be too, in the face of intelligence agencies that actively disrupt any form of protest with false flag moles and propaganda / mass media (See: Occupy movement, W(ikileaks) T(ask) F(orce), even in other countries, like with the "orange revolution"), and eating mostly tiring high-fructose high-fat "food". I'm pretty sure that would leave me apathetic too.
This is the government. And with that, I do not mean what e.g. teabaggers think they mean. I mean the corporations and their lobbyists. The actual ruling class in the US (and here too, mostly). The teabaggers just have never experienced an actual government, that is on their side against the ruling class. (Think French revolution against the nobility, or US independence against [foreign] nobility.) So you have to understand why they think they want a small "government". They actually want less lobbyists. Just like everyone else does.
So... how about that? Let's get rid of lobbyists once and for all. Since the US government is already taken by them, we cannot rely on them ever changing that. Since the whole governmental system around it, is already shaped to allow nothing else, we cannot use elections or mass-media, etc, to do this. It has to come in the form of a "high-road" revolution, where the US citizens will push forward no matter what, but will not engage in the evilnesses, mass-murder, terrorism, etc, the corporation-rulers will no doubt engage in. No matter what. Otherwise it will just end up being the same after the revolution, since those revolting will have become like the ones they hated, in the process.
As a German, who grew up in the 80s, let me say: I can haz cool America back again?
Secret lobbyism is the biggest threat to democracy (Score:4, Interesting)
Ick! (Score:2)
Fears of the rich exerting undue influence seem to be justified.
FTFY. Surprise, surprise! Lawyers, politicians, bureaucrats and lobbyists. Did anyone expect anything other than this result?!?
Seems Legit. (Score:3)
That data looks pretty safe to me, I mean, what could possibly go wrong
In all seriousness though if these amendments are too ludicrous they won't go past proposals, and if they do they will struggle to make it to domestic legislation.
we hope.
Re: (Score:2)
If you get a bunch of expert debaters and politicians, then ask them to make decisions about a complex and sensitive matter that they have no idea about, they are going to ask someone who knows a little more than them. They are going to be more able to listen to the louder voices among those who know more. It may just be that the loudest voices on the planet belong to Americans. I mean American companies.
This is how it goes... However if they where smart, they would be able to understand what the background motives of the experts could be, and try to get opinions from several experts with differing motives (preferably also experts who's motives are not financial). This is where politicians seem to fail, at least here in Finland.
UK a US state? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It's going to be complicated.
Could end up that Scotland is part of the EU and the rUK exits the EU. Then Wales and Northern Ireland could be unhappy about still being lumped with England since the strongest anti-EU sentiment is definitely concentrated in the south-east of England.
The Conservative party is the most vocal anti-EU of the main parties and yet also the most vocal about adopting Central European Time. Bit schizophrenic, eh? Of course the pro-Tory press will daily promote the idea that European le
Re: (Score:1)
It's going to be complicated.
Could end up that Scotland is part of the EU and the rUK exits the EU. Then Wales and Northern Ireland could be unhappy about still being lumped with England since the strongest anti-EU sentiment is definitely concentrated in the south-east of England.
The Conservative party is the most vocal anti-EU of the main parties and yet also the most vocal about adopting Central European Time. Bit schizophrenic, eh? Of course the pro-Tory press will daily promote the idea that European legislation on human rights makes it easy for terrorists to avoid jail and give all prisoners who actually end up there a cushy time while immigrants get an easy life at tax payers expense. The people who swallow all that seem to be a bit oblivious to the fact that EU directives on human rights and employment also protect them, which is the real reason the Tories want out; it'll be easier to oppress the proles.
Never mind the fact that something like half the exports of the UK go to the EU zone. If Brits decide to leave the EU they'll be excluding themselves from any influence over the inner workings of their most important export market. It would be a truly bizarre situation if Scotland remained in the EU but England left and even more bizarre if Wales and other regions began to think about increased independence because they don't want to be dragged out of the EU by a bunch of ultra natinoalist English Tories. T
Re: (Score:2)
Thing is the European Convention on Human Rights has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the European Union. So getting out of the E.U. won't help in that regard.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah... And? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you really shocked by this? The media companies already own the EU.
Bought and paid for. Just like the rest of the world other than a few 'evil' countries who will eventually bend over just the same. They have no other choice left that doesn't lead to the same end.
At the very least the mega raid should have tipped you all off by now. You WILL dance to the tune of the USA. And the USA dances to the tune of Hollywood.
The only thing you should really be shocked by is it took them this long to roll it out. You'd better get used to the idea. The one world is here. And it's not under the thumb of some evil dictator or secret organization. It's the multinational corporations and the media industry is right there at the top of the list.
And they've already won. We've been handing them money, power, and control for decades now. We are the good little consumers who WILL do as we are told or else. It's all over but the shouting and acceptance if we wan't our nice modern lives to continue.
He was close... But only thought it was one country.
"The real owners are the big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions. Forget the politicians, they're an irrelevancy. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don't. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They've long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the statehouses, the city halls. They've got the judges in their back pockets. And they own all the big media companies, so that they control just about all of the news and information you hear. They've got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want; they want more for themselves and less for everybody else."
"But I'll tell you what they don't want. They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don't want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They're not interested in that. That doesn't help them. That's against their interests. They don't want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they're getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago.
"You know what they want? Obedient workers people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork but just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, reduced benefits, the end of overtime and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it. And, now, they're coming for your Social Security. They want your fucking retirement money. They want it back, so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They'll get it. They'll get it all, sooner or later, because they own this fucking place. It's a big club, and you ain't in it. You and I are not in the big club."
-george carlin
Re: (Score:2)
Luckily enough the EU parliament consists of many individualists and providing some of them are made aware of this nice tally of subservience by some of their colleagues I see little chance of these amendments making it into the actual ruling.
Re:The EU citizens don't "pay the MEPs' salaries". (Score:4, Interesting)
So ... in your fantasy country of the United States of No Taxes at All, your politicians get no salary at all?
Re: (Score:2)
So ... in your fantasy country of the United States of No Taxes at All, your politicians get no salary at all?
Nope. We've got the same problem over here - and it's getting worse.
I'm just saying that 1) providing the money for paying their salaries and 2) being their boss and expecting them to follow your orders (or even pay attention to your wishes), are separate issues ... ... and that I'm sick of the "I pay your salary!" foolishness distracting people from actually DOING something EFFECTIVE to solve the
Re: (Score:3)
You could replace "MEP" with "MP" in your diatribe and you'd have the same point but different context. So what?
As with any politician in Europe, you fire them by voting elsewhere, etc.
Wrong concern (Score:3)
While it is concerning that a U.S.-based lobby has this much power, the real issue is that nobody should be listening to the American Chamber of Commerce. If the EFF started writing EU legislation, we'd be jumping for joy.
Fears of the U.S. exerting undue influence.. (Score:1)
This is disgusting (Score:1)
The worst offenders are from the UK, of which I am a citizen. Unfortunately, none of them represent the area I am from, although I am seriously considering contacting them anyway.
Basically, these pigs with their snouts in the trough are traitors to the UK. By taking the position of US corporations, against the interests of their own citizens, personally I believe their citizenship should be revoked, and they should be deported to the US.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't expect an answer since none of them represent my region but I asked lots of questions about why they can't find time to think and write their own
Re: (Score:2)
He did close by saying that he thought that there are some interest groups lobbying against the proposed amendments which I found ironic because one of the points I raised was that he seems to only being listening to lobby groups representing big business, including those outside of the EU and ignoring individuals from inside the EU, i.e. his own consituents.
That's funny (Score:2)
My response to this, and other nonsense regarding IP issues, can be lifted word for word from Arkell v. Pressdram. Both of them.
Lobbyplag is javascript infested (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would love to mod you up, but no points today. I, too, went there and found the "if you won't play with our javascript, we won't let you look". At least they were clever and entertaining about it.
I have a similar fetish against unnecessary flash pages, and certain Very Large Game Companies have sites you cannot view without Flash installed. They, however, lack the sense of humor of Lobbyplag.
Or perhaps the sense of humor of a constipated badger.
Not the US...US based lobbyists. (Score:2)
I for one welcomed our (Score:1)
From the "Blame everything on the EU" crowd (Score:2)
I've checked all 4 MEPs mentioned in the article: all are Tory (conservative) British MEPs.
This is the party that hammers the most and the hardest the "Blame it on the EU" key.
I am physically sickened (though not at all surprised) that these lowlifes are completelly in the pocked of American interests.
The sooner the UK leaves the EU, the better: we need to get rid of the turncoats working for foreign powers.
Re: (Score:2)
The MEPs simply agree with the lobbyists (Score:1)
I know there are abuses, but simply agreeing with a lobbyists is nothing wrong. The MEP, it seems to me, has to think about businesses in Europe as well as individuals so there has to be a balance in the regulations. There could and should be lobbyists on both sides of an issue since all a lobbyists does is represent a group and bring their opinion to the decision makers. So here we have a business lobbyist convincing a conservative (pro business) MEP that the lobbyist's position has merit. Not a tough sel
Re: (Score:2)
So until someone starts talking about secret payments of some kind, all I see is someone being convinced.
Just wait a couple of years until they're voted out.
Not much later their knowledge of the subject at hand will be recognised by one of the companies that have sponsored the lobbyists and the ex politician gets appointed to the board of directors.