[budududuroiu]

Afaik, EU rules provide for urgent procedure only for proposals at first reading, while here it was used to compress a second reading vote and skip committee, just perfectly timed for the last sitting before recess.

The absolute majority seems to be an anti-paralysis instrument, where the onus is on the Parliament to reject something put in motion by the Council. I think the the asymmetry is that a vote to trigger the urgency procedure only requires a simple majority, whereas a rejection of that same legislation requires absolute majority.

To my reading, this reinforces the idea that Parliament is designed to be more of a rubber stamp for the Council.

[Vinnl]

Thanks. Do you know then why of the majority that voted against today, enough people voted in favour of the urgency procedure?

[coldtea]

Saving face before (saying "see, I voted against") then doing what's asked of them by the lobbyists anyway where it's less apparent.

[Vinnl]

Sure, but I'm interested in a steelmanned explanation before judging.