[nicetryguy]

Thank god the EU (and sometimes Cali) are finally standing up to these huge tech companies. The federal legislative and executive branches of BOTH parties don't seem to have that type of spine as the stagnant wages and purchasing power of millennials and gen z continues its death spiral.

[mytailorisrich]

The EU is extending its interest and own power. Nothing to do with us the people, and in this case actually worrying.

[timeon]

Are you not from UK? You are not part of EU.

[piva00]

Worrying in what sense?

[mytailorisrich]

As an EU citizen, it does not sit well with my idea of a free democratic society to ban an interest group from making representation just because they refuse to subject themselves to what are little more than "show trials" conducted for politicians' own benefits.

The EU's institutions are on a wrong path, IMHO.

[smilingsun]

It's only the second time in history that a lobbying entity is banned. Second time since Monsanto in 2017. That's not a "path". Source: the first paragraph of the article.

This has nothing to do with "show trials". If you hold 14 lobbying badges and do not respect the European Parliament's Employment Committee's repeated requests to discuss important matters of employment in the European Union, then Amazon is really showing contempt for the lawmakers and the European institutions.

It's very understandable why they are talking about a "red line" here: If a company of the size and importance of Amazon refuses to sit down with lawmakers and discuss problems caused by their commercial activities on a European-wide scale, then they're not showing the kind of social and political responsibility that's fair to require from a corporation with direct access to European lawmakers.

The decisive body seems to agree:

> all quaestors were in favour of authorising the secretary general to withdraw their long-term access badges

There's more detail here:

https://www.politico.eu/article/amazon-lobbyists-face-ban-fr... https://euobserver.com/digital/158150

[piva00]

They wouldn't have been banned if they were present when required, right? What should be the rules then, they can pick and choose when they are present because it's convenient to them or should they be around when it's also not in their interests but in the interest of the EU?

Almost every political action is for politicians' benefit, that's the whole incentive, it's unfortunate because I'd prefer a world where politicians just do the right thing but we can't have a political system that depends on the morality of everyone involved to do the right thing.

[mytailorisrich]

Reading between the lines, there is likely no legal obligation for Amazon to attend those hearings, which again sound like Soviet show trials against them for purely political and ideological reasons.

Again, if Amazon has been breaking the law in their warehouses that's the job of the courts and employment tribunals.

The EU Parliament has been going from bad to worse over the years, it's now just ideology and populism. Instead of using Amazon as punching ball they should rather ponder why the EU economy and EU companies are falling behind...

[piva00]

> Instead of using Amazon as punching ball they should rather ponder why the EU economy and EU companies are falling behind...

Probably because it's not a free-for-all on who makes more money with no accountability to 2nd and 3rd order effects on society. If we care about citizens' wellbeing before profits there are many things that become less profitable and/or competitive than in places with less safeguards against corporations damages.

[manuel_w]

> Reading between the lines, there is likely no legal obligation for Amazon to attend those hearings

Is there a legal obligation for Amazon to have access to the European parliament?

When Amazon is ignoring the Parliament when they seek to talk to them, it just seems fair that the Parliament is ignoring Amazon when they want to talk.

Checks and balances.